ESHS/HSS Annual Meeting

‘The Legion of Cultists [and] Their Weird Theories of Healing’: Contested Expertise and Challenged Authority in Christian Scientist, Osteopathic and Chiropractic Reflections on the 1918-19 Influenza Pandemic

• In Event: Epidemic and Illness in the Modern Era 1

English Abstract

Writing in response to journalist Richard Collier’s 1970s call for recollections of the 1918-19 ‘Spanish Flu’, one US letter writer thought Collier should know ‘a bit of historical information about this epidemic which has been well known in our chiropractic profession for many years’. Chiropractic care during the pandemic had, the author claimed, resulted in greater recovery rates than treatments offered by mainstream medical practitioners, demonstrating medical expertise which he felt deserved retrospective recognition. Separately, a 1920s reflection by the Church of Christ, Scientist discussed the pandemic in the context of the authority granted to Christian in WW1 medical settings, where Christian Scientist soldiers nursed sick troops. Mainstream medical attitudes during the pandemic did not reflect these perceived expansions to the accepted canon of medical expertise; doctors instead grouping chiropractors, osteopaths and Christian Scientists as 'cultists' and 'quacks'. However, in post-pandemic reflections, all three alternative medical traditions reconceptualised their pandemic experiences to highlight perceived successes in challenging mainstream medical authority and gaining ground as legitimate sources of early 20th century medical expertise.
This paper investigates the meaning-making process by which chiropractors, osteopaths and Christian Scientists understood their position as medical practitioners during, and in the aftermath of, the 1918-19 pandemic. It explores how each tradition crafted their own narrative of pandemic authority and expertise, in opposition to mainstream denigration, and reflects on the insular nature of the resulting ‘alternate’ histories of the pandemic which have largely been discussed only within each medical tradition’s literature. The paper thus engages with themes of knowledge creation, authority, and the contested character of early 20th century US medical practice.

Author

• Islay Grace Shelbourne, University of St Andrews