Ulrich von Hutten (1488–1523), a renowned sixteenth-century German humanist, documented the symptoms of the epidemic that swept through Europe starting around 1495, commonly known as the French Disease. While it has traditionally been associated with venereal syphilis, Dutch tropical physician Willem F. R. Essed proposed in 1933, largely unnoticed to this day, that this new disease might instead be tropical yaws. This study establishes a clear link between Hutten’s reported symptoms and yaws, especially in its secondary and tertiary stages. The skeleton discovered in 1968 on Ufnau Island in Lake Zurich where Hutten died and was buried, exhibits distinct bone manifestations of ancient treponematosis with a pattern more consistent with yaws than syphilis. Furthermore, the correspondence between Hutten’s main symptoms and the lesions observable on the 1968 skeleton further confirms the identification of these human remains. The historical evidence of yaws significantly contributes to our understanding of this early modern epidemic.

This investigation sheds light on the social history of pathogenic dirt and its significance for shaping medical practices during the nineteenth century. It consists of an analysis focusing on Swedish medicine, using 8800 yearly reports written 1820–1900 by Swedish provincial doctors for the National Board of Health in Stockholm. The main argument is that the provincial doctors’ perceptions of the relationship between dirt and health during this century can be better understood by focusing on similarities in the handling of different kinds of pathological dirt over the course of many decades, rather than seeing interest in cleanliness as something mostly unprecedented. A novel cleanliness regime became dominant during the latter third of the century, meant to counter a new hybrid between everyday dirt – bodily emanations from healthy bodies – and matter believed to have caused miasmatic and contagionistic disease. New ideas about filth and its impact on health played a crucial role in the development of public health and sanitation movements, and were a precondition for everyday dirt becoming a central medical problem around the turn of the twentieth century, but as is shown, they built on old precedents. Thus, the miasmatic and contagionistic approach to disease shaped conceptions of hygiene and cleanliness.

This article primarily concentrates on the theoretical and intellectual dimensions of nature cure, particularly efforts to revive it during the second half of the nineteenth century. Little is known about specific medical professionals or theories concerning the Victorian philosophy of nature cure, although this philosophy is mentioned in general terms in studies on alternative medicine and hygiene. This article illuminates a Victorian nature cure philosophy through the works of Edward W. Lane (1823–1889). As a physician and hydropathist, Lane aspired to create a new form of medical system, ‘hygienic medicine’, seeking answers to the questions ‘What is disease?’ and ‘What is medicine?’ throughout his career. Lane was among many physicians interested in nature’s healing power during his time. However, few undertook as thorough a theorisation of nature cure philosophy as Lane did in the latter half of the nineteenth century, a period that presented unprecedented challenges in reconciling medicine with nature. This study explores the subtle nuances of the concepts that Lane actively used in his theoretical explanations, including ‘nature’, ‘laws of health’ and ‘vital force’, interpreting his efforts as a reconciliation between Romantic naturalism and laboratory medicine. The aim of this study is not to re-evaluate the significance of Lane’s medical theory itself. It rather uses Lane as a lens to reveal the intricacies of Victorian nature cure philosophy.

Historical research on efforts to reduce the stigma associated with venereal disease (VD) generally dates these campaigns back to the 1930s. Within the United States, one of the earliest attempts to detach VD from its traditional association with sexual immorality occurred during the late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century, when the New York City dermatologist Lucius Bulkley coined the term syphilis insontium (‘syphilis of the innocent’) in the hopes of demonstrating that many of those who contracted this disease did so through non-sexual contact. Gaining widespread acceptance within the medical community, Bulkley’s ideas served as the intellectual foundation for a discursive assault on the prevailing belief that syphilis constituted the ‘wages of sin’—one designed to destigmatise the disease and to promote more scientific responses to it. However, the effects of this anti-stigma rhetoric were often counterproductive. Encouraging doctors to discern ‘innocence’ or ‘guilt’ through assessments of a patient’s character, syphilis insontium often amplified the disease’s association with immorality. With the passage of time, physicians became increasingly aware of these problems, and in the 1910s, a backlash against Bulkley’s ideas emerged within the American medical community. Yet even with the resultant demise of his destigmatisation campaign, discourses of ‘innocent syphilis’ continued to circulate, casting a long shadow over subsequent stigma reduction efforts.

Although historians have given close attention to the anti-vaccination movement that gripped late-Victorian England, relatively little scholarship explores how doctors and health officials responded or asks what strategies and assumptions structured how they might oppose the vaccine opponents. This article traces the advent and actions of the Jenner Society, a smallpox vaccination advocacy group founded in 1896 by Dr. Francis Bond. His goal was to publicly confront the leading anti-vaccinationists and to effectively conduct an anti-anti-vaccination campaign. The Jenner Society appeared amidst disputes over how and even whether vaccination should be publicly debated – disputes shaped both by long-standing attitudes toward professional propriety and also by indecision about what sorts of political advocacy were suitable for medical practitioners. Vaccination was shifting toward a more voluntary administration, and the Jenner Society represents how civil society, the popular press, and the modern tools of persuasion were becoming increasingly central to public health governance. The Jenner Society encapsulated the profession’s disdainful attitude toward populist medical dissent, and this essay argues that the tone and deportment of anti-anti-vaccinationism had the effect of encouraging doctors to overlook and neglect other, probably more significant, sources of vaccine skepticism. Preoccupied with rebutting and attacking vaccination’s enemies, public “controversialists” like Bond waged the first true large-scale pro-vaccination propaganda campaign, but they ultimately were unable to address the underlying dynamics of vaccine evasion. This history holds important lessons today for those interested in constructing more effective ways to effectively counteract medical misinformation and anti-vaccinationist beliefs.

This article analyses the depictions of immunity and immunological functions employed in proprietary medical advertising in British newspapers between 1890 and 1940. Using marketing copy to gain insights into the ways immunity was presented to the public and normalised outside of medical institutions and publications, I offer four main areas of discussion. First, I present an analysis of the ways advertisements evoked both natural and artificial immunity in their marketing copy, thereby affording us insights into the ways immunity was made palatable both to those supportive of and opposed to vaccinations. I then unpack the ways in which this advertising copy often emphasised immunity rather than the immunological, that is, presented immunity as resistance to infection achieved by purchasing particular brands, rather than as part of a defensive process taking place at a cellular level. Third, I examine the ways in which advertisements engaged with futurity and drew on a narrative of social exclusion that pitted created communities of the immune against the non-immune. Finally, I analyse the ways in which immunity was used to connect the biological and the psychological, looking particularly at the ways immunity against worry was sold to the public.

We chart and assess the scope and utilisation of state-supplied hospital infrastructure in British Africa, c. 1900–60. Using archival sources, we examine the heterogeneity in colonial administrations’ investment into curative healthcare provision across various regions of British Africa. Our research highlights significant disparities in healthcare provision during the colonial period. These disparities were shaped by a range of observable factors, including differences in colonial policies, budgets, investment priorities, and the availability of medical personnel. We test stylised facts about public goods provision derived from previous literature and highlight the importance of understanding the historical context in shaping healthcare systems in Africa today.

This paper provides an account of a specific operation – the removal of the thymus gland (thymectomy) to treat the rare neurological condition myasthenia gravis – from its first performance in 1936, by the American surgeon Alfred Blalock, to the publication in 2016 of an international multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) of the technique. Thymectomy was the subject of a transatlantic controversy in the 1950s, in which the main players were the English surgeon Geoffrey Keynes, and American neurologists and surgeons from New York, Boston, and the Mayo Clinic. The resolution of this controversy involved the use of increasingly sophisticated statistical techniques, but also crucially other influences including the social transformation of thoracic surgery, and competition between the leading American centres. The consensus achieved after this controversy was challenged in the late 1970s, eventually prompting the implementation of a trial acceptable to twenty-first-century evidence-based medicine. This account will demonstrate that surgical innovation in the period covered required increasing attention to the statistical basis of patient selection and outcome evaluation; that the processes of technical innovation cannot be regarded as separate from developments in the professional culture of surgery, and that one of the consequences of these changes has been the gradual eclipse of the prestigious autonomous surgeon.

In the first months of the Spanish Civil War, the Spanish doctor Frederic Duran Jordà developed a new method of blood transfusion which overcame the era of direct arm-to-arm transfusions. While Duran was experimenting in Barcelona and the Aragon front, hundreds of foreign doctors came to Spain with the help of internationalist associations and offered their services to the Republican government. The Czechoslovak Dr Karel Holubec entered Spain in May 1937 and practiced in a mobile hospital funded by the Czechoslovak Committee to Aid Democratic Spain, receiving blood from Duran’s laboratory. This article aims to study how Duran and Holubec transferred the method of blood transfusion to Czechoslovakia through interpersonal contact, conferences, and performances. This paper argues that while individual actors played a crucial role in the diffusion of medical practices, this circulation was determined by a unique historical and socio-political framework. The Spanish Civil War, the International Brigades, and the invasion of Czechoslovakia by Nazi Germany were not only the historical context of medical innovation but an integral part of it.