J. Marion Sims: Pioneer of Medical Science Now Erased From History BY History

[JoeB131]

n 1874, Mary Rafferty, an Irish servant woman, came to Dr. Roberts Bartholow of the Good Samaritan Hospital in Cincinnati for treatment of her cancer. Seeing a research opportunity, he cut open her head, and inserted needle electrodes into her exposed brain matter.[11] He described the experiment as follows:

Okay, is there a statue to him somewhere?
Um, no, there isn't. In fact, he was roundly denounced at the time and his actions brought about bans on human experimentation.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

We might be so ignorant as to judge historical acts by the standards of today even as we take for granted the benefits developed.

 

[reconmark]

Born in Lancaster County, South Carolina in 1813, James Marion Sims entered the medical profession when doctors didn’t undergo the same rigorous coursework and training they do today. After interning with a doctor, taking a three-month course and studying for a year at Jefferson Medical College, Sims began his practice in Lancaster. He later relocated to Montgomery, Alabama, seeking a fresh start after the death of his first two patients.

He later reflected in his autobiography The Story of My Life on the advantages he found to working on people that were essentially his property: “There was never a time that I could not, at any day, have had a subject for operation.” According to Sims, this was the most “memorable time” of his life.

Sims wrote that the women had “clamored” for the operations to relieve their discomfort—but whether they consented or not was never captured in any other historical record.

Lucy endured an hour-long surgery, screaming and crying out in pain, as nearly a dozen other doctors watched. As Sims later wrote, “Lucy’s agony was extreme.” She became extremely ill due to his controversial use of a sponge to drain the urine away from the bladder, which led her to contract blood poisoning. “I thought she was going to die…it took Lucy two or three months to recover entirely from the effects of the operation,” he wrote.

After 30 operations on one woman, a 17-year-old enslaved woman named Anarcha who had had a very traumatic labor and delivery,


Writer and medical ethicist Harriet Washington says Sims’s racist beliefs affected more than his gynecological experiments. Before and after his gynecological experiments, he also tested surgical treatments on enslaved black children in an effort to treat “trismus nascentium” (neonatal tetanus)—with little to no success.


He would operate on African-American children using a shoemaker’s tool to pry their bones apart and loosen their skulls.

When any of Sims’s patients died, the blame, according to him, lay squarely with “the sloth and ignorance of their mothers and the black midwives who attended them.”


So some white people on this board are attempting to excuse a medical sadist and racist...how typical...

 

[JoeB131]

We might be so ignorant as to judge historical acts by the standards of today even as we take for granted the benefits developed.

so by that logic, when we genocided the Native Americans to get the land you live on now, that was okay, because, shit, that was the 'Standard" of the day, right?

Um... no.

Sims was a medical sadist. He did what he did to black women because if he did that shit to white woman, they'd have lynched his ass.

 

[toobfreak]

As always, in your own stupid way Bulldog, you either go out of your way to make an ass of yourself, or prove you only argue for the sake of arguing, even when your point is flawed. How dare you compare a legitimate doctor trying to help people and save lives by treating the sick brought to him ill who WANTED to get better with Nazi war criminals who took prisoners who weren't even sick and against their will, infected them with disease, glass, dirt and all other kinds of maladies you wouldn't want to do to an animal, JUST TO SEE THE RESULT. If you even bothered you read your own link or think past the level of a 5-year old, you'd see that.

except that's not what happened with Sims.

People didn't bring their slaves to Sims for treatment. They SOLD sick slaves to him so he could do procedures that weren't tested or proven on them.

Maybe Bulldog is being a bit over the top, but not by much.

I guess its easy to lie when you don't bother to know your facts. Sims is revered as the father of modern gynecology, not some Nazi death camp fiend, and was trying to help people, heal people and all these people needed treatment for which there was none at that time. His developments changed the face of medicine for all time and has saved countless lives, and he operated according to the best practices of the day, the way things were done back in the 1840's, yet idiots like you insist on trying to judge him by today's standards 170 years after the fact, and if that is not good enough, then make up crap. And yes, the statue was placed 120 years ago but was moved once before.

 

[toobfreak]

Born in Lancaster County, South Carolina in 1813, James Marion Sims entered the medical profession when doctors didn’t undergo the same rigorous coursework and training they do today. After interning with a doctor, taking a three-month course and studying for a year at Jefferson Medical College, Sims began his practice in Lancaster. He later relocated to Montgomery, Alabama, seeking a fresh start after the death of his first two patients.

He later reflected in his autobiography The Story of My Life on the advantages he found to working on people that were essentially his property: “There was never a time that I could not, at any day, have had a subject for operation.” According to Sims, this was the most “memorable time” of his life.

Sims wrote that the women had “clamored” for the operations to relieve their discomfort—but whether they consented or not was never captured in any other historical record.

Lucy endured an hour-long surgery, screaming and crying out in pain, as nearly a dozen other doctors watched. As Sims later wrote, “Lucy’s agony was extreme.” She became extremely ill due to his controversial use of a sponge to drain the urine away from the bladder, which led her to contract blood poisoning. “I thought she was going to die…it took Lucy two or three months to recover entirely from the effects of the operation,” he wrote.

After 30 operations on one woman, a 17-year-old enslaved woman named Anarcha who had had a very traumatic labor and delivery,


Writer and medical ethicist Harriet Washington says Sims’s racist beliefs affected more than his gynecological experiments. Before and after his gynecological experiments, he also tested surgical treatments on enslaved black children in an effort to treat “trismus nascentium” (neonatal tetanus)—with little to no success.


He would operate on African-American children using a shoemaker’s tool to pry their bones apart and loosen their skulls.

When any of Sims’s patients died, the blame, according to him, lay squarely with “the sloth and ignorance of their mothers and the black midwives who attended them.”


So some white people on this board are attempting to excuse a medical sadist and racist...how typical...

Pure rubbish.

 

[reconmark]

Born in Lancaster County, South Carolina in 1813, James Marion Sims entered the medical profession when doctors didn’t undergo the same rigorous coursework and training they do today. After interning with a doctor, taking a three-month course and studying for a year at Jefferson Medical College, Sims began his practice in Lancaster. He later relocated to Montgomery, Alabama, seeking a fresh start after the death of his first two patients.

He later reflected in his autobiography The Story of My Life on the advantages he found to working on people that were essentially his property: “There was never a time that I could not, at any day, have had a subject for operation.” According to Sims, this was the most “memorable time” of his life.

Sims wrote that the women had “clamored” for the operations to relieve their discomfort—but whether they consented or not was never captured in any other historical record.

Lucy endured an hour-long surgery, screaming and crying out in pain, as nearly a dozen other doctors watched. As Sims later wrote, “Lucy’s agony was extreme.” She became extremely ill due to his controversial use of a sponge to drain the urine away from the bladder, which led her to contract blood poisoning. “I thought she was going to die…it took Lucy two or three months to recover entirely from the effects of the operation,” he wrote.

After 30 operations on one woman, a 17-year-old enslaved woman named Anarcha who had had a very traumatic labor and delivery,


Writer and medical ethicist Harriet Washington says Sims’s racist beliefs affected more than his gynecological experiments. Before and after his gynecological experiments, he also tested surgical treatments on enslaved black children in an effort to treat “trismus nascentium” (neonatal tetanus)—with little to no success.


He would operate on African-American children using a shoemaker’s tool to pry their bones apart and loosen their skulls.

When any of Sims’s patients died, the blame, according to him, lay squarely with “the sloth and ignorance of their mothers and the black midwives who attended them.”


So some white people on this board are attempting to excuse a medical sadist and racist...how typical...

Pure rubbish.

It's only rubbish because it totally invalidates your historical fairy tale...the man was a medical sadist, racist and charlatan.
I can understand your fondness for him...

 

[toobfreak]

Born in Lancaster County, South Carolina in 1813, James Marion Sims entered the medical profession when doctors didn’t undergo the same rigorous coursework and training they do today. After interning with a doctor, taking a three-month course and studying for a year at Jefferson Medical College, Sims began his practice in Lancaster. He later relocated to Montgomery, Alabama, seeking a fresh start after the death of his first two patients.

He later reflected in his autobiography The Story of My Life on the advantages he found to working on people that were essentially his property: “There was never a time that I could not, at any day, have had a subject for operation.” According to Sims, this was the most “memorable time” of his life.

Sims wrote that the women had “clamored” for the operations to relieve their discomfort—but whether they consented or not was never captured in any other historical record.

Lucy endured an hour-long surgery, screaming and crying out in pain, as nearly a dozen other doctors watched. As Sims later wrote, “Lucy’s agony was extreme.” She became extremely ill due to his controversial use of a sponge to drain the urine away from the bladder, which led her to contract blood poisoning. “I thought she was going to die…it took Lucy two or three months to recover entirely from the effects of the operation,” he wrote.

After 30 operations on one woman, a 17-year-old enslaved woman named Anarcha who had had a very traumatic labor and delivery,


Writer and medical ethicist Harriet Washington says Sims’s racist beliefs affected more than his gynecological experiments. Before and after his gynecological experiments, he also tested surgical treatments on enslaved black children in an effort to treat “trismus nascentium” (neonatal tetanus)—with little to no success.


He would operate on African-American children using a shoemaker’s tool to pry their bones apart and loosen their skulls.

When any of Sims’s patients died, the blame, according to him, lay squarely with “the sloth and ignorance of their mothers and the black midwives who attended them.”


So some white people on this board are attempting to excuse a medical sadist and racist...how typical...

Pure rubbish.

It's only rubbish because it totally invalidates your historical fairy tale...the man was a medical sadist, racist and charlatan.
I can understand your fondness for him...

Hey, I realize that you will think and say whatever you want regardless of what anyone else says or anything you read so good luck with that opinion. My "historical fairy tale" was derived from reading up on the guy and getting the unbiased facts, it's anyone's guess what your opinion is based on, but then, I really don't care, it's YOUR opinion, you think it reflects reality and you are stuck with it.

 

[JoeB131]

I guess its easy to lie when you don't bother to know your facts. Sims is revered as the father of modern gynecology, not some Nazi death camp fiend, and was trying to help people, heal people and all these people needed treatment for which there was none at that time.

I'm sure in his own deluded way, Mengele thought he was doing real science, too.

The thing is, Sims shouldn't be revered because he violated the human rights of his test subjects.

His developments changed the face of medicine for all time and has saved countless lives, and he operated according to the best practices of the day, the way things were done back in the 1840's, yet idiots like you insist on trying to judge him by today's standards 170 years after the fact, and if that is not good enough, then make up crap. And yes, the statue was placed 120 years ago but was moved once before.

Now we need to m ove it to a recycling yard. I hear the going rate for bronze is pretty good now

The thing was, slavery was just as wrong 170 years ago as it is now. Now we are just having the discussion that a guy who perfected his art by mutilating women who had no say in the matter is not a hero.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Born in Lancaster County, South Carolina in 1813, James Marion Sims entered the medical profession when doctors didn’t undergo the same rigorous coursework and training they do today. After interning with a doctor, taking a three-month course and studying for a year at Jefferson Medical College, Sims began his practice in Lancaster. He later relocated to Montgomery, Alabama, seeking a fresh start after the death of his first two patients.

He later reflected in his autobiography The Story of My Life on the advantages he found to working on people that were essentially his property: “There was never a time that I could not, at any day, have had a subject for operation.” According to Sims, this was the most “memorable time” of his life.

Sims wrote that the women had “clamored” for the operations to relieve their discomfort—but whether they consented or not was never captured in any other historical record.

Lucy endured an hour-long surgery, screaming and crying out in pain, as nearly a dozen other doctors watched. As Sims later wrote, “Lucy’s agony was extreme.” She became extremely ill due to his controversial use of a sponge to drain the urine away from the bladder, which led her to contract blood poisoning. “I thought she was going to die…it took Lucy two or three months to recover entirely from the effects of the operation,” he wrote.

After 30 operations on one woman, a 17-year-old enslaved woman named Anarcha who had had a very traumatic labor and delivery,


Writer and medical ethicist Harriet Washington says Sims’s racist beliefs affected more than his gynecological experiments. Before and after his gynecological experiments, he also tested surgical treatments on enslaved black children in an effort to treat “trismus nascentium” (neonatal tetanus)—with little to no success.


He would operate on African-American children using a shoemaker’s tool to pry their bones apart and loosen their skulls.

When any of Sims’s patients died, the blame, according to him, lay squarely with “the sloth and ignorance of their mothers and the black midwives who attended them.”


So some white people on this board are attempting to excuse a medical sadist and racist...how typical...

Very typical since anesthesia was not in wide use. ALL operations were done without anesthesia and it was considered a blessing when the patient passed out from the pain.

 

[toobfreak]

The thing is, Sims shouldn't be revered because he violated the human rights of his test subjects. The thing was, slavery was just as wrong 170 years ago as it is now.

Another Libtard stuck on trying to conflate something that happened a long, long time ago and judge it by today's standards. Truth is you have NO IDEA the perceptions and attitudes on human rights back then. No one then was charged with any crime. What was done was done as the only way and means they had at the time to try to learn more about the body and improve medicine. This was 20 years before the Civil War and 60 years before the electric light bulb had even been conceived. They got around on horseback on dirt roads. They worked by candle light and gas lamp and were only beginning to understand even about germs. 120 years ago, they built a statue to the guy and honored him at the Academy of Science. People were suffering horribly and dying and this guy worked tirelessly trying to find ways of helping people and end suffering in the only ways he could and what he did was totally aboveboard and sanctioned. Yet morons like you can't get their head unstuck from the idea that way back then, this is how life was and want to impose values and standards from the far distant future that were not only unavailable at the time, but would have been unthinkable at the time.

Your thinking Joe is as troglodytic as if someone from two centuries in the future condemned you as a doctor today for operating on patients with scalpels and sewing them up with needle and suture, and using x-rays and MRIs because in the far distant future they had long since abolished such practice and considered doing so abhorrent and appalling.

 

[JoeB131]

Another Libtard stuck on trying to conflate something that happened a long, long time ago and judge it by today's standards. Truth is you have NO IDEA the perceptions and attitudes on human rights back then.

Oh, I am sure that he was able to get away with that sort of shit because the people he was operating on were only considered a fraction of a real person.

This was 20 years before the Civil War and 60 years before the electric light bulb had even been conceived. They got around on horseback on dirt roads. They worked by candle light and gas lamp and were only beginning to understand even about germs. 120 years ago, they built a statue to the guy and honored him at the Academy of Science.

And then they realized he did some pretty awful shit because he could. THat's the point here. He created pretty barbaric procedures by testing them on people who had no rights.

Let me put this a simple way. Let's say they found the lost notebooks of Dr. Mengele and found out he found a cure for cancer. Would that make what he did at Auschwitz any less terrible?

Your thinking Joe is as troglodytic as if someone from two centuries in the future condemned you as a doctor today for operating on patients with scalpels and sewing them up with needle and suture, and using x-rays and MRIs because in the far distant future they had long since abolished such practice and considered doing so abhorrent and appalling.

The technological sophistication wasn't the point here. The point was, the people he operated on he PURCHASED like you would buy a chicken or a cow. They had no ability to refuse the operations or give informed consent to a guy who was basically just fucking around until he found something that worked.

Now, maybe what we are doing today will be considered barbaric 200 years from now... But the thing is, it's a matter of informed consent. The doctor explains your condition, gets your consent and offers other alternatives. He practices a procedure that has been peer reviewed and tested.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Another Libtard stuck on trying to conflate something that happened a long, long time ago and judge it by today's standards. Truth is you have NO IDEA the perceptions and attitudes on human rights back then.

Oh, I am sure that he was able to get away with that sort of shit because the people he was operating on were only considered a fraction of a real person.

This was 20 years before the Civil War and 60 years before the electric light bulb had even been conceived. They got around on horseback on dirt roads. They worked by candle light and gas lamp and were only beginning to understand even about germs. 120 years ago, they built a statue to the guy and honored him at the Academy of Science.

And then they realized he did some pretty awful shit because he could. THat's the point here. He created pretty barbaric procedures by testing them on people who had no rights.

Let me put this a simple way. Let's say they found the lost notebooks of Dr. Mengele and found out he found a cure for cancer. Would that make what he did at Auschwitz any less terrible?

Your thinking Joe is as troglodytic as if someone from two centuries in the future condemned you as a doctor today for operating on patients with scalpels and sewing them up with needle and suture, and using x-rays and MRIs because in the far distant future they had long since abolished such practice and considered doing so abhorrent and appalling.

The technological sophistication wasn't the point here. The point was, the people he operated on he PURCHASED like you would buy a chicken or a cow. They had no ability to refuse the operations or give informed consent to a guy who was basically just fucking around until he found something that worked.

Now, maybe what we are doing today will be considered barbaric 200 years from now... But the thing is, it's a matter of informed consent. The doctor explains your condition, gets your consent and offers other alternatives. He practices a procedure that has been peer reviewed and tested.

Ohhh it's the slavery you object to. Well, too bad, there were slaves at that time. You can't impose your anti slavery standards of today on those back then.

 

[Aba Incieni]

We might be so ignorant as to judge historical acts by the standards of today even as we take for granted the benefits developed.

so by that logic, when we genocided the Native Americans to get the land you live on now, that was okay, because, shit, that was the 'Standard" of the day, right?

Um... no.

Sims was a medical sadist. He did what he did to black women because if he did that shit to white woman, they'd have lynched his ass.

You are free to give your home back to a native American.

Or do you just blame others?

 

[Aba Incieni]

Another Libtard stuck on trying to conflate something that happened a long, long time ago and judge it by today's standards. Truth is you have NO IDEA the perceptions and attitudes on human rights back then.

Oh, I am sure that he was able to get away with that sort of shit because the people he was operating on were only considered a fraction of a real person.

This was 20 years before the Civil War and 60 years before the electric light bulb had even been conceived. They got around on horseback on dirt roads. They worked by candle light and gas lamp and were only beginning to understand even about germs. 120 years ago, they built a statue to the guy and honored him at the Academy of Science.

And then they realized he did some pretty awful shit because he could. THat's the point here. He created pretty barbaric procedures by testing them on people who had no rights.

Let me put this a simple way. Let's say they found the lost notebooks of Dr. Mengele and found out he found a cure for cancer. Would that make what he did at Auschwitz any less terrible?

Your thinking Joe is as troglodytic as if someone from two centuries in the future condemned you as a doctor today for operating on patients with scalpels and sewing them up with needle and suture, and using x-rays and MRIs because in the far distant future they had long since abolished such practice and considered doing so abhorrent and appalling.

The technological sophistication wasn't the point here. The point was, the people he operated on he PURCHASED like you would buy a chicken or a cow. They had no ability to refuse the operations or give informed consent to a guy who was basically just fucking around until he found something that worked.

Now, maybe what we are doing today will be considered barbaric 200 years from now... But the thing is, it's a matter of informed consent. The doctor explains your condition, gets your consent and offers other alternatives. He practices a procedure that has been peer reviewed and tested.

And we've come so far along today that 40% of all infanticide is committed voluntarily by black women. How very civilized.

 

[Moonglow]

J. Marion Sims, often called The Father Of Modern Gynecology---- how many women's lives has he saved by his pioneering work? So much so that they erected a statue to him in Central Park where it has stood for ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY YEARS --- --- --- now gone.

Why?

View attachment 188678


Not just a general pioneer in the field of surgery, his most significant work was to develop a surgical technique for the repair of vesicovaginal fistula, a severe complication of obstructed childbirth. Sims conformed to accepted medical practices of the time, he performed surgery for a therapeutic result, and the women he operated on suffered what could be a catastrophic condition for their health and quality of life.

There is only one problem: medical science and techniques were still very crude and in their developmental stages back in the 1840s. Anesthesia was only then beginning to become available and not wholly accepted, and the standard at the time to try out new procedures was quite naturally: on slaves.

But these women all suffered from a medical condition and Sims helped them. Not only did they get helped and cured, for free, but they advanced the field of medicine. Back in the 1840s, this is how things were done. The man was a pioneer and a hero.

Now today though, he is being seen through the eyes of a world 170 years later hell bent on condemning all aspects of slavery. Despite all the good he did and his good intentions and standards for the day, none of that matters now. He operated on slaves as all doctors did in pioneering medical work back then, they were usually brought to him by their owners because they were very ill and it was hoped he could treat and help them, but therefore: VERY BAD MAN. His statue after 120 years has been removed from Central Park to cleanse the conscience of a PC world gone mad to forget its own history.

View attachment 188680

Once adorning the New York Academy of Medicine, his statue is now being moved to be hidden in shame in the cemetery near where he is buried. Until now, he was honored "for his service to suffering women, Empress and slave alike."

Central Park statue of gynecologist J. Marion Sims removed

How much do slaves normally earn?

 

[Moonglow]

We are experiencing modern day book burning.

How many books have you burned?

 

[Moonglow]

Anything and everything will be cleansed by leftists.

Their hatred is so deep and strong they can't see the good anyone has ever done, all they look at is the bad.

Ask any of them to say some good about America and all you will get is; obama

I know what you mean...The Nazi's did some important health related experiments also...

 

[Dan Stubbs]

J. Marion Sims, often called The Father Of Modern Gynecology---- how many women's lives has he saved by his pioneering work? So much so that they erected a statue to him in Central Park where it has stood for ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY YEARS --- --- --- now gone.

Why?

View attachment 188678


Not just a general pioneer in the field of surgery, his most significant work was to develop a surgical technique for the repair of vesicovaginal fistula, a severe complication of obstructed childbirth. Sims conformed to accepted medical practices of the time, he performed surgery for a therapeutic result, and the women he operated on suffered what could be a catastrophic condition for their health and quality of life.

There is only one problem: medical science and techniques were still very crude and in their developmental stages back in the 1840s. Anesthesia was only then beginning to become available and not wholly accepted, and the standard at the time to try out new procedures was quite naturally: on slaves.

But these women all suffered from a medical condition and Sims helped them. Not only did they get helped and cured, for free, but they advanced the field of medicine. Back in the 1840s, this is how things were done. The man was a pioneer and a hero.

Now today though, he is being seen through the eyes of a world 170 years later hell bent on condemning all aspects of slavery. Despite all the good he did and his good intentions and standards for the day, none of that matters now. He operated on slaves as all doctors did in pioneering medical work back then, they were usually brought to him by their owners because they were very ill and it was hoped he could treat and help them, but therefore: VERY BAD MAN. His statue after 120 years has been removed from Central Park to cleanse the conscience of a PC world gone mad to forget its own history.

View attachment 188680

Once adorning the New York Academy of Medicine, his statue is now being moved to be hidden in shame in the cemetery near where he is buried. Until now, he was honored "for his service to suffering women, Empress and slave alike."

Central Park statue of gynecologist J. Marion Sims removed

Progressive busy rewriting History. Surprise they did not do it at night. They hate History unless it make whites look bad. MLK did some bad stuff and I don"t see them rewriting that History. I really don"t care about the color of anyone but I really hate those who try to make History disappear or the changing of it. I could list Criminals who walk the street after killing two girls from Chicago and the Rich women of Miami Fla just love his artwork.

 

[Moonglow]

Society gets to decide what they want in public to represent the community...Things change, get used to it as the white power vacuum continues..