The Supreme Court, bastion of conservatism

[Pelado]

Knock it off. The US constitution was signed in 1787. The world's first vaccination occurred in England in 1796. Medicine was a joke until the mid to late nineteenth century - it probably did as much harm as it did good.

Have you not considered that SU likes it that way?

[SeattleUte]

Knock it off. The US constitution was signed in 1787. The world's first vaccination occurred in England in 1796. Medicine was a joke until the mid to late nineteenth century - it probably did as much harm as it did good.

This is beside the point. But it wasn't a total joke. Stop being such a smarty pants.

https://www.britannica.com/science/h...e-18th-century

Vaccines didn't just happen from one day to the next. Medicine was launched.

[All-American]

No. He's the one who wanted life terms for senators as well as judges.

But how did he feel about tractors?

[Jeff Lebowski]

This is beside the point. But it wasn't a total joke. Stop being such a smarty pants.

Folks, this is the closest thing we have to SU admitting he is wrong about something.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Theodoric of York, Medieval Barber! They should have included a dental plan as well; poor George.

Speaking of George, he was a fan of bloodletting. Might actually be what killed him - or at least contributed to his death.

Bloodletting was also popular in the young United States of America, where Benjamin Rush (a signatory of the Declaration of Independence) saw the state of the arteries as the key to disease, recommending levels of bloodletting that were high even for the time. George Washington asked to be bled heavily after he developed a throat infection from weather exposure. Within a ten-hour period, a total of 124–126 ounces (3.75 liters) of blood was withdrawn prior to his death from a throat infection in 1799

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloodletting#:~:text=George%20Washington%20asked%20to%20be,a%20throat%20infection%20in%201799.

[Moliere]

Speaking of George, he was a fan of bloodletting. Might actually be what killed him - or at least contributed to his death.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloodl...n%20in%201799.

That reminds me of the scene in the John Adams miniseries where he’s sick in the Netherlands and the doctor is bloodletting him. Yuck!

[Jeff Lebowski]

That reminds me of the scene in the John Adams miniseries where he’s sick in the Netherlands and the doctor is bloodletting him. Yuck!

It is crazy how common it was. On top of all of the erroneous theories on what it was supposed to accomplish, I guess it gave some kind of temporary feeling of euphoria, which helped convince people it was beneficial.

[falafel]

It is crazy how common it was. On top of all of the erroneous theories on what it was supposed to accomplish, I guess it gave some kind of temporary feeling of euphoria, which helped convince people it was beneficial.

Lightheadedness?

[BigFatMeanie]

It is crazy how common it was. On top of all of the erroneous theories on what it was supposed to accomplish, I guess it gave some kind of temporary feeling of euphoria, which helped convince people it was beneficial.

Perhaps because it was the scientific consensus of the time?

[Bo Diddley]

Perhaps because it was the scientific consensus of the time?

I wonder what scientific consensus we have today that will be looked down upon in another 200 years the same way we view blood letting.

[Jeff Lebowski]

The Supreme Court, bastion of conservatism

Perhaps because it was the scientific consensus of the time?

Nope. The medical community didn’t even start using the scientific method until the late 1800s. Prior to that it was mainly the observational method and folklore. It was precisely the scientific method that debunked bloodletting.

[falafel]

Nope. The medical community didn’t even start using the scientific method until the late 1800s. Prior to that it was mainly the observational method and folklore. It was precisely the scientific method that debunked bloodletting.

I don't think he meant scientific method. Just general agreement among practitioners that it worked.

[SeattleUte]

Nope. The medical community didn’t even start using the scientific method until the late 1800s. Prior to that it was mainly the observational method and folklore. It was precisely the scientific method that debunked bloodletting.

What!? This is absolutely not true. The Enlightenment is defined as the beginning of the scientific revolution and rediscovery of the scientific method. Of course, they didn't have all the answers, but that is what science is all about. What nonsense have you been reading?

[Donuthole]

I don't think he meant scientific method. Just general agreement among practitioners that it worked.

So, like, a group of doctors who believe what they are doing helps cure their patients because that is what they have personally observed in their limited, anecdotal experience? Glad we have the scientific method now to prevent a group like that from speaking up and misleading people.

[SeattleUte]

Medicine employed the scientific method in the eighteenth century, long before the"late 1800s."

https://www.rcseng.ac.uk/-/media/files/rcs/museums-and-shop/hunterian/exhibition-archive/exhibiting-difference/the-enlightenment-and-medicine.pdf