Sunday, March 27, 2005

Dr. Ganchrow, past president of the Orthodox Union, claims to have seen in his practice at least 1 case of meningitis after mezizah b’peh.

2 Comments:

At 7:52 PM, Blogger jewishwhistleblower said...

Dr. Ganchrow, past president of the Orthodox Union, wrote "Journey Through the Minefields: From Vietnam to Washington, an Orthodox Surgeon's Odyssey" which is available on Amazon. As an aside, chaper 18 of this book deals in detail with his handling of the Rabbi Lanner sexual scandal at the OU/NCSY.


http://ganchrowworldview.blogspot.com/2005/03/terry-schiavo-some-thoughts-52505.html
...
"As an aside, Rabbi Moses Tendler who is not only my Rabbi, but my Professor of Genetics while at Yeshiva College has been outspoken and courageous in his insistence that oral suction of blood (mezizsh B’peh ) is not an integral part of the halachah of circumcision and for the safety of the child should have a plastic pipette used for suction. I myself when in practice saw one or two (I am not certain) cases of meningitis after mezuzah b’peh. The emotional attacks upon him have no place in serious discussions on human life."
...

 
At 3:26 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The controversy and disputes arising from the knowledge that the practice of mzuzah b'peh may be harmful to an infant parallels the dispute over the writings of Rabbi Slifkin. Unfortunately many in our communities are unable to allow scientific knowledge, the kind of understanding that brought us such things as the atom bomb, the Salk vaccine and insights into some of the deseases that rob us of life, to penetrate what they "know", what they think the Torah "says" or what "the rabbis" say it "says". A basic premise of our understanding of the universe and of our morality is that we must not do something that itself is harmful or threatens life. Unfortunately, when scientific understanding allows us to realize that the practice is, or may have been, dangerous to children due to the communication of harmful microorganisms, some defenders of blind ritual would deny the insight rather than confront the new reality it allows us to comprehend. But maybe it is this very process that goes to the heart of the dispute that is going on. Is our understanding of the Torah, and of the universe itself, fixed and immutable, or is it dynamic and subject to re-evaluation based on our increased understanding of our environment?
There have always been some who would rather cut the tongue out of a man who would speak a new reality rather than confront the implications of his words. It would be well to understand that occassionally such people occupy positions to which we give reverence and great respect. Perhaps it is we, each one of us, that must reevaluate the direction of our reverence.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home