It's really discouraging, this thing about the truth

Last night I looked at Erik's old medical records. I found the entries by doctors about Erik's condition. Did he or did he not have renal osteodystrophy? Did he, or did he not have rickets? The doctors at the time came to the erroneous conclusion that he did not.

Now nearly 30 years later, it has become apparent that Erik must have had renal rickets then, just as he has renal rickets now. Erik even received calcitriol at that time. Even though it was for only the briefest period, it was strikingly curative for his slipped capital femoral epiphysis. Not one person related cause and effect. Were the doctors, already at that time, more concerned about their reputation, or did they really not know? The truth about cause and effect is a tricky matter, if you don't want to see it. I saw it then, and I see it now. Science strives for the truth. It needs champions now, or else we'll be old Rome all over again.