Contradictions on Pork

By Dirk Anderson, last updated Apr. 2025

Nearly all 19th century health reformers were adamantly opposed to eating pork. After Mrs. White got onto the health reform bandwagon in the 1860s, she frequently warned her followers of the dangers of eating pork. For example, she wrote:

Never should one morsel of swine's flesh be placed upon your table.¹

What few Seventh-day Adventists are aware of is a testimony written in the late 1850s in which Mrs. White rebukes the Curtis family in Iowa for not eating pork. This testimony was written before Mrs. White's 1864 visit to Caleb Jackson's Health Institute in New York where Mrs. White acquired her health message. Jackson forbid the eating of pork at his clinic, believing it caused consumption [tuberculosis] and scrofula. Before long, the Whites adopted this lifestyle. However, six years earlier—before she received her health message from Jackson—Sister White held a much different opinion:

If God requires His people to abstain from swine's flesh, He will convict them on the matter. He is just as willing to show His honest children their duty, as to show their duty to individuals upon whom He has not laid the burden of His work. If it is the duty of the church to abstain from swine's flesh, God will discover it to more than two or three. He will teach His church their duty.²

Analysis

A Testimony of God's Spirit?

Brother and Sister Curtis studied their Old Testaments and came to the conclusion that eating pork was wrong. The Whites were made aware of their discovery. In Old Testament times, when there was a question that needed a divine answer, the prophet would inquire of the Lord. How did the sect's prophetess respond? What light did she receive from the Lord on this subject? Does she congratulate them for their good, scholarly Old Testament study? Consistent with New Testament theology, Mrs. White soundly rebukes them!³ If brother Curtis's health practices were in accordance with God's health plans, then why would God's messenger rebuke him?

H.E. Carver, an early Adventist who was friends with the Curtis family, shares what happened to this family:

Brother and Sister Curtis were among my most intimate friends for many years, and as we lived side by side a portion of the time, I knew some of the circumstances connected with the vision instruction given above. Sister Curtis was a very conscientious woman, and becoming satisfied (long before any movement was made in that direction by Eld. and Mrs. White) that pork-eating was injurious, she tried to banish it from the table. This produced trouble. Sister C. was a sincere believer in Mrs. White's divine inspiration, and from the extract given above, it appears that she must have written to her for instructions, which she received as above; and that professedly through vision. ... Bro. Curtis also stated that Eld. White had endorsed on the back of the letter the following in substance:

'That you may know how we stand on this question, I would say that we have just put down a two hundred pound porker.'⁴

Question: Was God the source of this testimony to Sister Curtis? Or was her testimony influenced by James, who was quite fond of eating pork?

James White's Article on Pork

In 1850, James White wrote an article defending the eating of pork by Christians. Here is how he concludes the article:

Some of our good brethren have added "swine's flesh" to the catalogue of things forbidden by the Holy Ghost, and the apostles and elders assembled at Jerusalem. But we feel called upon to protest against such a course, as being contrary to the plain teaching of the holy scriptures. Shall we lay a greater "burden" on the disciples than seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and the holy apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ? God forbid. Their decision, being right, settled the question with them, and was a cause of rejoicing among the churches, and it should forever settle the question with us.⁵

It is easy to understand why Sister Curtis' health practices seemingly irritated the Whites because they thought they had already settled the matter forever! Furthermore, the Whites probably felt that they were God's channel of truth to the sect, and they may not have taken too kindly to someone bringing in health reforms without their prior approval. A few years later, of course, Mrs. White adopted the exact same stance as Mrs. Curtis on pork, and then she brought it to the sect as if she had received the instruction from God through visions. The Curtis family no doubt found that to be confusing.

Pork Causes Cancer and Leprosy?

Mrs. White not only contradicted herself. She also contradicted medical science. She claimed that pork caused various diseases, including leprosy and cancer:

God prohibited the Hebrews the use of swine’s flesh because it was hurtful. It would fill the system with humors, and in that warm climate often produced leprosy. ... But God never designed the swine to be eaten under any circumstances.

God did not prohibit the Hebrews from eating swine's flesh merely to show his authority, but because it was not a proper article of food for man. It would fill the system with scrofula, and especially in that warm climate produce leprosy and disease of various kinds.⁶

The eating of pork has produced scrofula, leprosy, and cancerous humors.⁷

These dire warnings turned out to be false alarms. Scientists now know that pigs do not carry leprosy (Mycobacterium leprae). Therefore, it is impossible for them to transmit leprosy to humans. Scientists have confirmed "pigs...are immune to the disease."⁸ A. A. Benenson confirms that leprosy is not found in pigs:

Infectious agent—Mycobacterium leprae, the leprosy (Hansen's) bacillus. Other than in man it has multiplied in the footpads of mice, in the tissues of immunosuppressed rodents, and in the armadillo. Reservoir—Man is the only known reservoir.⁹

Mrs. White was closer to being accurate when it comes to pork causing cancer. Heavy pork consumption can raise the probability of a person developing certain types of cancers.¹⁰ However, the cause is not the one suggested by Mrs. White. It is a myth to suppose that eating cancerous meat causes cancer in humans. Even when injected with live cancerous organisms, laboratory animals do not develop cancers:

It is true that many varieties of germs, molds, and microscopic parasites can often be cultivated from various kinds of tumors, but when these microscopic organisms are injected into animals they fail to cause any cancerous or other tumors to grow.¹¹

The primary reason pork raises the risk of cancer is not the meat itself but the chemicals that are used to cure processed meat along with the methods of smoking or cooking it (high-temperature cooking—grilling, frying, or broiling).¹²

Conclusion

According to Mrs. White, in 1858, God had no burden to restrict Adventists from eating pork. It was not until after Mrs. White visited Jackson's clinic that she concluded eating pork was wrong. Her revelation was not based on Bible sturdy or even a manufactured vision. When health reform was not yet fashionable, Mrs. White opposed those who acted on conviction. When health reform became the new religious currency in the sect, she reversed course and demanded obedience. A revelation from God that moves with cultural winds is not revelation—it is adaptation. If the light changes depending on human influences, then what we are left with is not the voice of Heaven, but the voice of a fallible human.