101 Questions - About Ellen White and Her Writings

Question 66: Did Mrs. White’s understanding of the cause of diseases change? (“Ellen G. White’s Progressive Move From Miasma Theory to Germ Theory”)

Ellen White fully endorsed the miasma theory of the cause of disease until the 1890s, when the germ theory became more commonly accepted. The difference is evident in the establishment of Adventist medical schools. For the Battle Creek medical school, she promoted the idea of prospective instructors being trained in the use of “natural remedies” and water treatments—basics of the naturopathic schools of the day. 101Q 146.1

When the medical school was established in Loma Linda in the early twentieth century, naturopathic colleges were increasing until in 1930 there were twenty, with more than ten thousand practicing naturopaths in the United States. But Ellen White had by then adopted the emerging germ theory and directed that the college at Loma Linda should become fully licensed as an allopathic medical school. Her prophecy that this college and its graduates would become the envy of other denominations has certainly been fulfilled. That would not be so today if we did not accept the principle that our understandings on the subjects of health are continually progressive. 101Q 146.2

While there are many problems with modern medical procedures, there is much more gain than loss. And to revert to nineteenth-century medicine based on Ellen White’s understanding at the time is unfortunate and detrimental to the progress of our spiritual message. “The truth of God is progressive; it is always onward, going from strength to a greater strength, from light to a greater light” [Signs of the Times, May 26, 1890]. “Let the diet reform be progressive” [Testimonies for the Church, 7:135]. 101Q 146.3

I looked up Ellen White’s uses of the word miasma. Most of them were metaphorical; only one, as I recall, would I be willing to see squarely through the “miasma theory” glasses, and I can’t be certain that she had bought into the theory in full even then. We all use the language we have at our disposal to discuss matters, but the words mean what we make them mean. The fact that Mrs. White used the term miasma doesn’t prove that she believed disease came from foul odors; she could be referring to other unhealthful conditions in low-lying places. But it does not discredit her if she did believe the theory for a time and later changed her mind as more information became available. 101Q 146.4

I wonder if the miasma issue might not be parallel in some sense to what Mrs. White said about salt. Some of the reformers of her day had labeled it a poison (which it is in large enough quantities) and forbidden its use. She wrote, “I use some salt, and always have, because from the light given me by God, this article, in the place of being deleterious, is actually essential for the blood. The whys and wherefores of this I know not, but I give you the instruction as it is given me” [Counsels on Diet and Foods, 344]. The counsel she gave was sound, but she did not know (was not shown) the “whys and wherefores.” Might her counsel against living in the midst of rotting vegetable material also have been sound but not for the reasons she assumed it was (the “whys and wherefores”)? 101Q 147.1

[The Ellen G. White Estate Web site contains three questions and responses on this subject, all involving the same people and all with the same—or very similar—title lines. You can find more helpful material there.] 101Q 147.2