“The the false attribution to Mother Ravasio might be due to the fact that she may have helped promote this oil as a cure for leprosy as well as getting the Pasteur Institute to study this cure.”
I don’t know anything about this oil or Mother Ravasio but once a potential cure for anything is rejected by the medical community it is essentially dead. If Mother Ravasio is responsible for reviving an actual cure, as the above quote seems to suggest, then where is the “false attribution”.
Mother Ravasio established the largest center to help people with Leprosy in the Ivory Coast. This was a facility that was over 200,000 square miles in the Ivory Coast.
She should be recognized for this accomplishment. Additionally, I believe there is an effort to have her cause for sainthood to move forward.
In general, if there are errors involved in the process, it makes it harder for the person to be canonized. An example is what happened to Padre Pio when he was alive. He was banned from writing because of erroneous opinions about him.
My effort is to clear up this error so it is not propagated.
This huge center in the Ivory Coast probably allowed the focus of most of the world's resources for curing leprosy -- which might explain why it was known about the chaulmoogra oil. The amount of resources that this allowed to be applied to help people with leprosy probably helped them realize the benfit of the cure that was known about for centuries in China and Burma.
It is just that she is incorrectly the label that she found the first medicine that was a cure for leprosy. She did help promote this cure -- which is a wonderful thing.
The Chaulmoogra Oil was not a miraculuous cure. People who had advanced cases of leprosy saw limited benefit of this medicine.
However, people just coming down with leprosy could be easily cured.
Today, a trio of drugs are used to treat leprosy. The only reason for the multidrug regime is that leprosy was becoming resistant to the original drug (dapsone).