Doctors Call Boy's Recovery From Blindness a Miracle

What an oddly written story. He was "completely blind" but had a weaker eye? Blind but could still do an obstacle course in four minutes? Can now read and ride a bike when only one month ago he was "blind"? I think there will be a follow up story shortly stating that the treatment had failed.

Yes i agree that this is a miracle. We take sight and all our abilities for granted. He was deemed blind and scientists found a way for him to see again. That IS a miracle. For anyone out there who finds this wrong and is just going to preach about god and how god gave him sight. Just because thats your religion it does not mean its someone elses religion. I absolutely positively hate the fact that people are on here saying they dont credit the scientists what so ever and only credit god. The scientists who developed this potential cure worked hard to do so. Yeah as you may say they were created by god but not everyone believes in god. On top of that i personally consider this an amazing feat the scientists may have just found a cure for blindness and could potentially be used to gain many peoples eye sight back. And your gonna say that that is not a miracle. What disgusts me is your so ignorant and arrogant to believe that its no big deal that a little boy gained his eyesight back after suffering from a diseases that caused him to be blind. I'm sorry that im happy for him and that i believe i should be happy for him and that others should be happy for him. And im sorry that i was raised to not take what i have for granted on a daily basis so have a nice day.

Hi Julian,

It was the doctors and staff that called it "near biblical" to dramatize the real recovery this young man received by modern science. The blogger titled it a miracle.

Sight is not a right where you get that I do not know? Some consider it a gift. What it is, is a needed physical function for a fully successful life. He took four minutes when blind to progress through the obstacle course, seconds once he had sight. I mean no disrespect for successful blind beings, they work very hard to overcome and I appreciate it.

I do understand your fear of spiritual attachment to this or other "near biblical" happenings. However, there are religious people in this world including doctors, nurses, and other hospital staffers. Maybe the family themselves were religious, hence the term "near biblical."

I am sure that whoever used the term, had known it was going to make you or others blow a gasket another term might have been used.

Another point of view, is they used the term to get at those bible thumpers that insist on a medieval lifestyle for everyone, except for medicine. Chill out don't be like those barking dogs only for science instead.

Do you seriously believe that the scientist did this "miracle" all by themselves? They were guided by God.....Who do you think created their brains to be able to do this .... I thank God for this little boy's sight...and I am grateful to the doctors for this "miracle"

Patricia,

Thanks for your response. I used the term "right to sight" just because I thought it was catchy, though admittedly it might have been unwise of me to do so. I know that there isn't a "right" to being able to see, as, of course, it is an expected aspect of life.

Now, I believe I was clear in the implication that I am well aware that the same doctors who performed the gene therapy used the term, "miracle." My point is simple: that's misguided and unfortunate.

Even if spiritual/religious people accept science more because the same scientists and doctors label breakthrough, "miracles," it does nothing but perpetuate that science, on its own, is ineffective and not to be trusted. Many who rely heavily on what science has given them (i.e. computers, cars, television, air conditioning, centralized heating, etc) have a large distrust of science and the scientific community. Thus, spiritualist and religious answers look more appealing, and when they are attached to scientific and medical breakthroughs, it just encourages that distrust. "Only through GOD could they perform this!" or "GOD must have been involved in one way or another!" It's silly but it's also dangerous. It encourages laziness and ignorance.

I'll make no mystery of my disdain for religious/spiritualist beliefs, especially those that purport to be able to cure ailments or know the true answers to life (without the need for evidence), but it's not about my personal belief system; it's about the progress of science and medicine that is often stilted by these inane comments and beliefs. Besides, they only pick the good out of the bad for their "proof," despite the fact that there are probably more negative results in the constant search for scientific perfection than there are good. "He works in mysterious ways," is not a viable answer, by the way, because it offers no insight.

Anyway, I don't mean to sound like I'm "up in arms," but I feel these doctors and scientists that use words like "miracle" or terms like "near biblical" are doing themselves and science, as a whole, an extreme disservice. It's both dangerous and unaware of its true results.

Julian, I am actually blown away by your little rant over one word. Using it as an outlet to show your distain for any form of religion puts you in the same category as those who believe thier religion is better than everyone elses. Just a few quick facts. Miracle comes from the Late Latin word miraculum, which means a wonder or marvel. The Webster Dictionary lists the definition of miracle as "an extremely outstanding or unusual event, thing, or accomplishment" so unless you believe that a boy regaining his sight is less than amazing I feel sorry for you. To call it demeaning and fundamentally wrong is absurd. The work performed by the scientists and doctors was an extremely outstanding accomplishment, therefore by definition a miracle. Relax, be happy for the child and get over the fact that this is a miracle even in the most non-religious sense.

In7t8,

I would just like to point out that you conveniently left out the definition that implicates a supernatural force behind what would be considered, "a surprising and welcome event."

Though miracle also has the definition you used, I'm near positive that they also mean to imply some sort of divine intervention. And if they don't, well, that's what a lot of people will take from it, anyway (read the other comments and you'll see).

That may not matter to you, but to me, it matters a great deal. I don't believe science and religious/spiritual beliefs are compatible. It's ridiculous to assert anything of the kind when they are at complete odds with each other. While science attempts to answer the same questions that religious/spiritualism pretends to already know, it doesn't jump to fantastic explanations to answer them. In other words, science searches for the simplest answers that have a footing in reality, whereas religion and spiritualism will jump to a far-fetched conclusion and consider the matter closed. That is unscientific and works against the whole reason and purpose of science.

Lastly, even though your attempt at belittling my comment by calling it a "little rant," and twisting my previous post to make it seem that I don't consider this an extraordinary event (I do, thanks to breakthroughs in gene therapy), I just want to make it clear that, even though I am upset at the use of the word "miracle," I don't consider myself "right," I consider myself far more reasonable than those who consider this "of the divine." There's a difference between unrelenting dogma coupled with blind faith and logical assertions.

Oh, and the fact that those doctors called it "almost biblical" negates the idea that they may have meant the world "miracle" as just an amazing event without any divine implications.

That's all.

whos to say whom GOD chooses as Angels here on Earth to perform his "miracles" ?

Tim,

God ways are not human's ways and His thoughts are higher than human's thoughts for as far as the east is from the west so is God's ways and thoughts are from that of human. YOU ARE NOT GOD SO YOU WILL OF COURSE DO THINGS DIFFERENTLY FROM HIM.

Your disdain for God shows by how you write his name. You don't want to even give him the right to have his name capitalized. No matter, he loves you anyway.