Toward An Adventist Theology Of Health (8) - The Epidemiological Shift

The unique mixture of Adventist lifestyle characteristics described in last month's column (Holism, Pro-activity and Self-esteem) have been recognized, praised and even raised up as a convincing lifestyle paradigm for non-Adventists. They have been the subject of significant U.S.A. national media coverage on programs such as ABC News: World News Tonight and Good Morning America. This lifestyle has also been featured in international Magazines like the National Geographic’s article "Longevity: The Secrets of a Long Life". But Adventism’s relevance doesn’t end here. It also opens up significant socio-cultural implications. First, sickness and health are not purely personal but rather socially related events. Second, sickness and health are not just medical but have strong cultural aspects. Third, sickness and health are not to be considered uniquely from “proximal-causes” but also from a “distal-causes” perspective. These three assumptions are at the base of today's “Epidemiological Revolution”. The consequences of this evolving process in medicine and the social sciences nevertheless remain largely unexplored and ignored. Let’s consider, then, three socio-cultural implications of an Adventist lifestyle in light of this larger perspective.

1. The Epidemiological Shift

Richard Doll (28 October 1912 – 24 July 2005) was a British physiologist who became probably the foremost epidemiologist of the 20th century, turning the subject into a rigorous science. He was a pioneer in research linking smoking to health problems. With Ernst Wynder, Evarts Graham and particularly Bradford Hill, he was considered the first to prove that smoking caused lung cancer and increased the risk of heart disease (German studies had suggested a link as early as the 1920s but were forgotten or ignored until the 1990s). He also carried out pioneering work on the relationship between radiation and leukemia, as well as linking asbestos to lung cancer, and alcohol with breast cancer.

In 1950, collaborating with Austin Bradford Hill, he undertook a study of lung cancer patients in 20 London hospitals. At first he believed the cancer was due to a new material “tarmac”, or automobile fumes, but rapidly discovered that tobacco smoking was the only common factor. Doll himself stopped smoking as a result of his findings, published in theBritish Medical Journal in 1950, which concluded:

"The risk of developing the disease increases in proportion to the amount smoked. It may be 50 times as great among those who smoke 25 or more cigarettes a day as among non-smokers."

Four years later, in 1954, the “British Doctors Study”, a study of some 40 thousand doctors over 20 years, confirmed the suggestion, based on which the government issued advice that smoking and lung cancer rates were related. In 1955 Doll reported a case controlled study that has firmly established the relationship between asbestos and lung cancer. In 1966 Doll was elected to the Royal Society. The citation stated:

"Doll is distinguished for his researches in epidemiology, and particularly the epidemiology of cancer where in the last 10 years he has played a prominent part in (a) elucidating the causes of lung cancer in industry (asbestos, nickel & coal tar workers) & more generally, in relation to cigarette smoking, and (b) in the investigation of leukaemia particularly in relation to radiation, where using the mortality of patients treated with radiotherapy he has reached a quantitative estimate of the leukaemogenic effects of such radiation. In clinical medicine he has made carefully controlled trials of treatments for gastric ulcer. He has been awarded the United Nations prize for outstanding research into the causes & control of cancer & the Bisset Hawkins medal of the Royal College of Physicians for his contributions to preventative medicine."

In 1969, Doll moved to Oxford University to sit as the Regius Professor of Medicine. Initially, epidemiology was held in low regard, but in his time at Oxford he helped reverse this and subsequently expanded the revolutionary implications of this “Epidemiological Shift” in Medicine worldwide. Doll’s contribution to today's Epidemiology can be summed up in three points. First, against a still predominant “monogenic” conception of disease, based on a mono-factorial analysis, Doll proposed a multi-factorial approach through the so called “triangle of causation”. This includes the interplay of host, agent and environment. Second, against a still strong “linear” understanding of disease he defended a “non-linear” methodology. In Doll’s approach the causal relationship between the interacting agents is non-mechanical, dynamic, historical and reciprocal, allowing positive feedback and bi-directionality. Third, against the radical commitment of today's medicine in establishing the priority of proximal causes of disease, he underlined the importance of the distal, hidden, indirect and contextual causes at work.

2. Adventist Epidemiological Studies

Adventist Health Studies (AHS) is a series of long-term medical research projects by Loma Linda University with the intent to measure links between lifestyle, diet, disease and mortality of Seventh-day Adventists. Adventists have a lower risk of certain diseases, and many researchers hypothesize that this is due to dietary and other lifestyle habits. This provides a singular opportunity to answer scientific questions about how diet and other health habits affect the risk of many chronic diseases.

a. Adventist Mortality Study

The first major study of Adventists, begun in 1960, has become known as the Adventist Mortality

Study. Consisting of 22,940 California Adventists, it entailed an intensive 5-year follow-up and a more informal 25-year follow-up. This study did indicate that Adventist men lived 6.2 years longer than non-Adventist men in the concurrent and parallel American Cancer Society Study, and Adventist women had a 3.7-year advantage over their counterparts. These statistics were based on life table analyses.

Specifically, comparing death rates of Adventists compared to other Californians:

  1. Death rates from all cancers was 40% lower for Adventist men and 24% lower for Adventist women

  2. Lung cancer 79% lower

  3. Colo-rectal cancer 38% lower

  4. Breast cancer 15% lower

  5. Coronary heart disease 34% lower for Adventist men, 2% lower for Adventist women

b. Adventist Health Study 1 (AHS-1)

An additional study (1974–1988) involved approximately 34,000 Californian Adventists over 25 years of age. Unlike the mortality study, the purpose was to find out which components of the Adventist lifestyle give protection against disease.

The data from the study have been analyzed for more than a decade and the findings are numerous, linking diet to cancer and coronary heart disease. Specifically:

. On average Adventist men live 7.3 years longer and Adventist women live 4.4 years longer than other Californians.

. Five simple health behaviors promoted by the Seventh-day Adventist Church for more than 100 years (not smoking, eating a plant based diet, eating nuts several times per week, regular exercise and maintaining normal body weight) increase life span up to 10 years.

. Reducing consumption of red and white meat was associated with a decrease of colon cancer.

. Eating legumes was protective for colon cancer.

. Eating nuts several times a week reduces the risk of heart attack by up to 50%.

. Eating whole meal bread instead of white bread reduced non-fatal heart attack risk by 45%.

. Drinking 5 or more glasses of water a day may reduce heart disease by 50%.

. Men who had a high consumption of tomatoes reduced their risk of prostate cancer by 40%.

. Drinking soy milk more than once daily may reduce prostate cancer by 70%.

c. Adventist Health Study 2 (AHS-2)

The Adventist Health Study-2 (AHS-2) began in 2002 with the goal of investigating the role of selected foods to change the risk of cancer. AHS-2 is designed to provide more precise and comprehensive results than previous research among Seventh-day Adventists. Church members are expected to be non-smokers, abstain from alcohol and are encouraged to eat a vegetarian diet. Many also avoid caffeine-containing beverages. However, adherence to these recommendations is quite variable.

Adventists in North America are almost entirely non-smokers. The vast majority are non-drinkers and the small number who consume alcohol do so infrequently. But they have a wide diversity in dietary practices. A small percentage are vegans, many follow a lacto-ovo vegetarian diet or eat meat less than once per week (semi-vegetarian) and about half have omnivorous diets similar to the general population.

These studies indicated that Adventists had lower risks for most cancers, cardiovascular disease and diabetes. Females lived 4.4 years and males 7.3 years longer when compared with the general California population. They also showed the advantage of a vegetarian diet among Adventists, found strong evidence that meat increased risk of colon cancer and coronary heart disease and that nut consumption reduced risk of coronary heart disease. Other significant associations between cancers and other foods have also been reported.

The epidemiological positive effects of the Adventist Lifestyle can be summarized in three points. First, the Adventist model has become a concrete “social” model not uniquely a person-related one. Second, this model is also a “long-historical” model because it can be variously measured and assessed diachronically in various generations. Third, this model is, as it was in its origins, a social alternative and “counter-cultural” model maintaining a revolutionary and apocalyptic stance.

3. For an Adventist “Hermeneutical Epidemiology”

Adventism is committed today to the Epidemiological analysis of disease and health through the consistent use of descriptive, analytical and experimental Epidemiology, at least in its high learning centers (e.g. Loma Linda). But, can epidemiological data be totally explained and understood by these kind of epidemiological tools? Only partially. A larger understanding is necessary. And we might call this additional cultural tool; “Hermeneutical Epidemiology”. This is the view which goes beyond a linear, analytical reading of the gathered data and inscribes it in a larger cultural perspective.

In fact, “Medical Adventism” today tends to read epidemiological data as “Theological Adventism” tends to read the Bible – without paying attention to the cultural context. It transposes to epidemiology its Biblical literalism, trying to understand the information by itself but not in relation to surrounding events.

For instance, it concludes that the Adventist Lifestyle is unique and better than others because Adventist men and women live longer than their counterparts. This is a linear and quantitative reading. A hermeneutical and qualitative cultural reading would show a more fundamental finding that is naively ignored. Not the “difference” but the “communality” between Adventists and non Adventists, despite of their different lifestyle choices. They both in fact die from the same diseases, even though in different quantitative proportions. Adventists also die from heart attack, breast, prostate and intestinal cancers, and not from leprosy or demonic-possession. Epidemiological data shows then that we are like others, inhabit the same world, face the same challenges and share the same sicknesses. For this reason we don’t need to isolate ourselves but rather learn to be with, to dialogue and be taught by others, because our particular virtues don’t put us on a different planet.

Hanz Gutierrez is a Peruvian theologian, philosopher, and physician. Currently he is Chair of the Systematic Theology Department at the Italian Adventist Theological Faculty of “Villa Aurora” and director of the CECSUR (Cultural Center for Human and Religious Sciences) in Florence, Italy.

If you respond to this article, please:

Make sure your comments are germane to the topic; be concise in your reply; demonstrate respect for people and ideas whether you agree or disagree with them; and limit yourself to one comment per article, unless the author of the article directly engages you in further conversation. Comments that meet these criteria are welcome on the Spectrum Website. Comments that fail to meet these criteria will be removed.

This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at

Since 1905, when Ministry of Healing was first published ALL of our Seventh day Adventist congregation groups SHOULD have begun to be known as The Healing Church – Body, Mind, Spirit.
This ONE textbook should have been promoted to be our Syllabus and Text.
I would grant to say that MOST SDAs do not even know there is such a book as Ministry of Healing.
I do not know of ANY congregation whose focus is HEALING.
Entertainment at 9:30 to 12 on Sabbath, Evangelism, YES.

Type II Diabetes – It is estimated that by 2025 1/3rd of Adult in US will have Type II. Even now there are many late teens with Type II on medication. Type II is due to resistance to Blood Glucose, to Insulin, to Leptin. Body cells become “stuffed”. This makes it difficult for both Glucose and Insulin to enter the cells for energy function. Rise in blood sugar signals the pancreas to send out even more Insulin. When signals appear, one begins on oral meds to stimulate more Insulin from the pancreas. When the pancreas becomes exhausted, then one begins on Insulin injections.[Progressing to Type I]. Type II can take up to 20 years to appear.
Elevated blood pressure is many times the 1st symptom of Type II.
Long-term diabetes has a very long list of damages to the body. But Type II can be reversed through life-style changes. One is maintaining normal weight for height. 6-9 servings of fruits and veges daily. 20-40 grams of fiber per day. 8-12 glasses of non-sugary fluids per day. 30 minutes of exercise [fast paced walking is good] per day. 10 minutes after each meal, or all at once after supper meal.
For non-vegies, beef and pork should be considered Fat Exchanges. Better skinned baked chicken and Omega 3,6 containing fish [catfish is not on this list].

“The Every Other Day Diet” is a program I discovered by accident a number of months ago. [doctors James Johnson and Donal Laub]. One does 500 to 700 calories every other day [the diet day]. Every other day, one can eat [within reason] what ever they want up to around 2000 cals. For the 1st 3-4 weeks they recommend using nutritional DRINKS for calorie intake on the Diet Days. One at breakfast. These can be taken to work and one just “sips” on them through out the day, if feeling hungry. One at Supper. One at Bedtime. Up to 4 per day. This is 14 days during the month. “Hunger” much of the time is really a “thirsty” signal for liquids, not food. So when feel hungry, drink non-sugary liquids – water, coffee, tea, diet drinks. Preferably water. Again “sip”, don’t guzzle so the liquid will be absorbed and not flushed out the kidneys.
The 2 days of calorie intake even if the non-diet day is 2000 cal, is less than would be normally eaten.
4- Instant Breakfast packs are 520 cals. This leaves room for some low cal vegetable or fruit finger foods that can be munched on during the day on Diet Day. One can use the no-cal salad dressing to dip in.


Thanks for this article. It suggests many useful lifestyle/ dietary protocols which can promote longevity. However IO am seeking an answer as to whether eating soy products is regarded as a “healthy” choice. I have stopped eating “big franks” and drinking soy milk. Were I diagnosed with prostate cAncer, the first thing I would do is head for a supermarket and buy a packet of non-aluminium of baking soda. I would take it for about 8 days, no more (as I would not be eager to die from hypertension either). The thing is to get the pH balance right , which cancer cells Hate , or even on the high side for a short period. I suggested this method to a lady friend who was booked for a hysterectomy and I also suggested . For blood thinner I suggested nattokinase(a fermented soy product) She has had no problems and its going on six years after the op. I certainly am NOT trying to demean the skills of the medical profession.But I think ordinary people should try to help themselves.

1 Like

Thank you for the article. As a scientist, I value epidemiological information, along with experimental information. The epidemiological information that identifies an overall pattern of wellness in SDAs in contrast to non-SDAs is convincing, and I am confident that that general pattern is correct. Specific factors that account for much of the variance include avoidance of smoking tobacco, encouragement of healthy exercise, and maintenance of healthy weight. Avoidance of flesh food and alcohol may also play important roles, but it is probably more a matter of not eating or drinking to excess that matters here. a strong case can be made that moderate consumption of fish (e.g., wild caught salmon) and wine in moderation (especially, red wine, like a cabernet or pinot noir or merlot) have health benefits. So, it is really important to understand what epidemiological evidence is and what it means, when taken in combination with experimental examination of causal relationships. Perhaps even more importantly, it is important to understand the relationship between generalities about populations and specific individual patterns of behavior and health. At the level of the individual, where it really counts, what we eat and drink and how much exercise of whatever kind we get becomes especially important.

I’m 75 years old and am pretty healthy. I was diagnosed with adult onset diabetes nearly 20 years ago. I was obese and not terribly careful with my diet. Mainly, I ate too much and exercised too little. After a health scare related to high glucose, I lost 30 pounds and took medication to keep my blood sugar from going too high. Finally, I got really serious about the situation and lost another 25 pounds through dietary restriction and daily exercise. Now my fasting AM glucose and glycated hemoglobin stay in the normal range without any medication. Diet and exercise have accounted for much more of the variation in my glucose and insulin metabolism than anything else.

Much of the impact on longevity of caloric restriction in nonhuman primates has been shown experimentally to be due to prevention of type 2 diabetes and its cascade of consequences. Further, type 2 diabetes is prevented in NHPs just by restricting weight to normal range. It is not even necessary to restrict them to 70-80% of normal weight. There is a lesson here for us.

Now, at age 75, I am not much concerned about longevity. I have lived long enough. I can enjoy what remains of my life if I stay healthy, so I make the effort to do both–enjoy life and stay healthy. I don’t want to be a burden on anyone, of course. I’d like to not outlive my resources or faculties. I am comforted by not believing in an afterlife. I’m not at all worried about what will become of me after I die. I hope I can fertilize some nice plants. That’s enough for me. I find it sad that so much effort is put into frightening people about the future. If religion helps you find peace and live well, great. When it weighs you down with fear and hatefulness, that’s not good.


Thanks for this interesting article. As I read the list of the “five simple health behaviors promoted by the Seventh-day Adventist church for more than 100 years”, I noticed that one of the five behaviors was “eating a plant based diet.” Two clients of mine own a video production company and have just recently competed a full length documentary named EATING YOU ALIVE, where they interview numerous well known plant based eating doctors, athletes, and Hollywood producer/director James Cameron and movie star Samuel L. Jackson. It was to air in Los Angeles, in the Sundance Sunset Cinema, Dec.2-8, 2016, and in New York, in the IFC Center, Dec 14-20, 2016. After these two opening dates it should appear in select theaters across the country. For more information you can go to Wishing good health to all.

1 Like

If Adventists are expecting eternal life, then wouldn’t longevity (an additional 10 years over those less fortunate) be of little concern? As a core “theology of health”, should we be speaking, not of longevity-for-longevity’s-sake, but of a higher quality of our years which keeps us available for service to others rather than focused inward or subjecting our time and other resources to the treatment for our own health issues? Of what use are those additional years if they are centered on self?

The God who promised less disease for those who followed his commands and decrees surely had some noble purpose in mind for those who would eventually enjoy the benefits of greater health.


Thanks for sharing.

As a public health worker and graduate of LLUSPH, I think your words are excellent observation:

Epidemiological data shows then that we are like others, inhabit the same world, face the same challenges and share the same sicknesses. For this reason we don’t need to isolate ourselves but rather learn to be with, to dialogue and be taught by others, because our particular virtues don’t put us on a different planet.<<

Spent much of my life out in communities—and have also worked within the “community” of church institutions.

I have found that the people “out there” are often more in tune, sharing, and filled with the wholeness message of kindness, art, and science of community/relationships than those within the narrow confines of self-satisfied virtue noted on the Advent planet and sometimes in its institutions.

For me, coming from an Advent heritage I grew up hearing lines like the “medical work” is the “opening wedge” . Sounds like “targeted populations” a phrase from historic public heath I dislike.

The “health work…or the health grace” may be a better way to formulate it. From pot holes to pot to policy to community to norms and how we treat each other it’s all “health”—a search for and affirmation and strengthening of kindness, wholeness, the building of human relationships and healthier communities.

Epidemiology is basic to our work, but getting hung up the particular without thinking of the whole can be a problem in public health just like “works” can be in the spiritual journey.

We, I believe, must concentrate on the entirety AND the specifics in great particularity, creating learning communities, and focused on engaging folks on the discussion on how to build healthy communities and personal relationships. As Dr. Jack Provonsha at LLU told me, the “great controversy” goes form he cellular level to the cosmic.

Seventh-day Adventists are clearly part of this world. We are not unique, but like to think we are. But our vocation is to truly help the world’s citizens, I believe, see that Wholeness and Love are central to Community Healing and personal and collective Meaning. Non-violence response as Jesus taught is also central to creating healthy communities.

For those of us in public health, I tell folks, it’s our “secular religion” And, for me the “health work” is the “spiritual journey”. They align with my understandings of my Seventh-day Adventist heritage. Take it easy.

We have Hope in the Advent of Kindness—the Source of Kindness.

Happy holiday seasons and a prosperous, healthy 2017. World wide and in your home and neighborhood.

1 Like

Seems like the way to come out smelling like a rose on a longevity “study” is to compare your control group with the “rest of Californians”, or the poor, suffering general public, who aren’t exactly known for taking care of themselves.

Hans, everybody can’t legitimately declare to be right here. Those promote chocolate eating, for example, say that eating the brownish bonanza at least two times/week will reduce CV disease by 37%. Those who promote golf claim that those who play the sport regularly can expect to live 5 years longer. Playing a racket sport such as tennis will decrease your chances of dying from any cause by half! Women who claim to enjoy sex likely will live 7-8 years longer than their counterparts who do not (or claim not) to like it. If you own a cat, you are 30% less likely to have a heart event. Where does it end?

It seems like you can research just about anything inherently half-decent on the surface and it will substantially decrease heart disease, stroke, cancer, etc. and add several years to your life.

I mean really, if all these studies are correct…, if I play golf and drink at least 5 glasses of water a day, I have zero chance of getting a heart attack. If I have sex at least 100 times per year and drink soy milk once daily, I have less than zero chance of developing prostate cancer.

If I own a cat, own a dog, garden at least 3 hours a week, use the stairs instead of the elevator, eat chocolate, eat whole grain bread, play tennis, eat four Hershey bars per week, drink a glass of wine three times a week, eat nuts several times a week, play golf, make a lot of whoopie, I can expect to live to the age of…

Until you compare your Adventist group to other groups who actually make an effort not be unhealthy, I find it nearly impossible to be convinced of your findings.

Your data is just getting lost in the “hobo soup” in the meantime.

UPDATE: Looks like I’m going to break the ole 140 mark. That is if I drink 4-5 cups of coffee a day according to a new Harvard Health study. And be looking at a 15% reduction of risk from stroke, diabetes, infection, heart disease, etc.

Who knew Dunkin Donuts was sitting smack dab on the fountain of youth and great health?

1 Like

JimB. The human relationships and healthier communities work of the Seventh day Adventist you brought up barely seen or dent the mainstream secular community, medias or business… Adventist health messages or cookbooks, none I last checked , openly available on the mainstream township or city book stores. The SDA theology of health seem fetter, sacrosanct , partisan in broad day light only serving the adventist communities through Adventist Book Center (ABC). Speak about adventist health messages. It’s a default. The SDA churches are not transparent at all, who the adventists are, in state medias, bookstores and health stores.


As an antidote to, thank God I am an Adventist, what about adding, to coin a word, an épainosological approach to health. That God cares enough to inform us how to be healthier-- “the Lord will keep you free from every disease”-- through the bible as well as later revelations, affirms that he cares for us, physically. Praise is due to such a compassionate one. How can we not feel compassion for and want to help others to be healthier, especially the most disadvantaged? (épainoso, praise)


With epidemiological studies I worry about the perception that statistically significant effects are biologically significant. One of the great advantages of epidemiological studies is the large number of data points, often so large that even very tiny differences reach statistical significance. So often we find that having a three time greater risk of something or 300% higher likelihood involves .06 compared with .02 or .03 vs. .01. I think back on a study I cited in which 14,000 people were studied to ascertain the relationship between age and cortisol level. The highly significant positive correlation was .20. That accounted for 4% of the variance. So I looked at the relationship between cortisol and age in rhesus monkeys, a data set with hundreds of data points. Voila! Throwing in all the data points the correlation came out exactly .20! Fortunately, I had longitudinal data for the monkeys, a luxury seldom available for human studies. So, I could plot an age X cortisol profile for each of many monkeys. The profiles show all sorts of patterns, few of which followed the trajectory shown by the data all lumped together. What occurred “in general” was not predictive of what occurred in individuals. I’m just saying… Beware of advice based on epidemiological generalizations. We probably all need to be working very hard to implement a personalized health program rather than something based on over-generalizations.


Where do you live? You seem unfamiliar with the large impact of the work of Adventists such as Dr John McDougall or chef Mark Anthony. At our local monthly vegetarian society (1,500 members) meeting, about 30% of our speakers are SDA and all others I have spoken with are highly familiar with the news about Adventist lifestyle. The Blue Zones movement – which features Adventist longevity – is also promoting a similar lifestyle and reaching millions.

God cares and good health practices can improve the quality of life, but I cringe whenever this OT text is used literally because no one was or is kept permanently “free from every disease.” I’ve heard it quoted in puzzlement when spiritual leaders die of cancer, as if it may hint that the deceased were not faithful to “our health message.”

Everyone dies. Even the most highly health disciplined Adventist. “For the living know that they will die.”


I cringe too.

It is a misguided notion to think that suffering is evidence of wrongdoing. Even Jesus suffered in the Garden of Gethsemane and again at the cross. The lesson from the book of Job is affirmation that worshipping God should transcend reward and punishment.


Wonderful Doctor Gutierrez!

A new book, THE MICROBIOME SOLUTION , by Robynne Chutkan, MD
is a fascinating avant garde, cutting edge concept about why a plant based diet promotes good health and longevity:

Apparently the good, beneficial, bacteria which inhabit our gut, contribute tremendously to our well being-- far more than hitherto imagined!

Plant based fibers are the preferred food for these good bacteria, so a plant deficient diet leads to a preponderance of bad, toxic germs in the gut.

I have started to eat more asparagus and artichoke hearts, whose fibers are gourmet gifts for my greedy gluttonous good germs!

Also kefir, sauerkraut and tempeh, which, being fermented foods, supply extra probiotics to build my beneficial bacterial colony.

We provide our “good gut germs” with a Michelin Three Star treat, when eating fiber rich vegetables!

Autism, Obesity, Depression, are all thought to be linked to gut disbiosis.
This has been proven, as disgusting as it may sound, by treatment with fecal transplants.

Another recent magnificent book, extolling plant based health:
Order from Amazon and you will not regret these two radical reads!


Point one : The Microbiome idea is a new aspect and carefully should be observed and fostered - without calling out loudly : "Weee already have - - - ". Anyway : Weshould wait for sound results .

Point two : Decades ago I found studies about religious subgroups - as nuns - with their active longevity and low rate in this or that disease. And I tried to bring Grossarth - Maticek to be acknowledged in SDA health circles - In took more than twendty years until he was recognized : His studies on health in relation to religious life are astonishing. When making a study on SDAs in Austria with 1600 responders ( that equals the average of Sabbathschool attendance) with Grossarth Maticeks scales - showed a high range in “formal religiosity” and “spontaneous religiosity”.

And some years ago I acquired some US “Nun studies” on Alzheimer from the US : with their brain state evaluated by independent pathiologists by autopsy : :Hig grades of typical Alzheimer degeneration, but - - conducting seminars up to their last days !

Why this ? What consequences ?

1 Like