We provide a brief account of the life and work of Jules Parrot, a significant figure in French paediatrics, about whom almost nothing has been written. We focus on his work relating to congenital syphilis, specifically reporting on the examination of a collection of bones taken at autopsy from children with congenital syphilis. The collection of bones was brought to London in 1879 by Parrot to illustrate a talk that he gave before the Pathological Society of London. Subsequently, it travelled a circuitous route to the Royal Free Hospital pathology collection, where it remained until we (GC and TW) ‘discovered’ it. The bones represent the largest assemblage of material from cases of congenital syphilis in the UK and they are important as they clearly demonstrate the skeletal lesions associated with congenital syphilis and are now irreplaceable. The bones have been identified to anatomical element and have come from a minimum of eight children, both foetuses and neonates covering the period 30–50 weeks post-conception. Radiological and micro computerised tomography examinations were carried out and three-dimensional models printed at twice life size. The models are durable and can be handled with impunity by students and others wishing to familiarise themselves with the skeletal changes shown.

The historical development and economic impact of pharmaceuticals in the UK are nowadays reasonably well documented. That industry has become the most profitable and fast growing of the country's high-tech industries. Its member firms undertake more than one-fifth of the national research and development (R&D) activities, one half being carried out in Britain, and currently achieve a £2.4 billion favourable trade balance with the rest of the world.

2011 marks the 175th anniversary of the United States National Library of Medicine (NLM) that traces its origins to 1836 and the commitment of the second US Army Surgeon General, Thomas Lawson (1789–1861), to purchase books and journals for active-duty medical officers. The occasion affords an opportunity to focus on the contributions of the NLM to the history of medicine and public health, and to look forward into the digital world of the twenty-first century as the NLM joins with like-minded institutions, scholars, educators, writers, students, and others to expand knowledge of medical and public health history for the advancement of scholarship across the disciplines and for the education of the general public. As more audiences become interested in medical and public health history, opportunities abound to broaden and deepen understanding of the past, present, and future of medicine and public health in order to help refine critical thinking about medicine and science, promote deeper understanding of medical and scientific concepts, and generally humanise medicine and public health by revealing the implications of disease and healthcare for individuals and communities in the United States and around the world.

Research councils, universities and funding agencies are increasingly asking for tools to measure the quality of research in the humanities. One of their preferred methods is a ranking of journals according to their supposed level of internationality. Our quantitative survey of seventeen major journals of medical history reveals the futility of such an approach. Most journals have a strong national character with a dominance of native language, authors and topics. The most common case is a paper written by a local author in his own language on a national subject regarding the nineteenth or twentieth century. American and British journals are taken notice of internationally but they only rarely mention articles from other history of medicine journals. Continental European journals show a more international review of literature, but are in their turn not noticed globally. Increasing specialisation and fragmentation has changed the role of general medical history journals. They run the risk of losing their function as international platforms of discourse on general and theoretical issues and major trends in historiography, to international collections of papers. Journal editors should therefore force their authors to write a more international report, and authors should be encouraged to submit papers of international interest and from a more general, transnational and methodological point of view.

During the 1960s and 1970s, the notion that the uterus is a useless and pathological organ after a woman has had ‘enough’ children emerged alongside news reports of excessive hysterectomy in Taiwan. This notion and hysterectomy became two sides of the same coin, the former pointing to the burden of birth control and cancer risk, and the latter to sterilization and removing cancer risk. I explore how, in post-war Taiwan, the notion became commonplace through the intersection of three historical formations: the medical tradition of employing surgery to manage risk (such as appendectomy for appendicitis), American-dominated family planning projects that intensified the surgical approach and promoted reproductive rationality, and cancer prevention campaigns that helped cultivate a sense of cancer risk. The gender politics operating in the family planning and cancer prevention projects were apparent. The burden of birth control fell mainly on women, and the cancer prevention campaign, centring almost exclusively on early detection of cervical cancer, made cancer into a woman’s disease. I argue that the discourses of reproductive rationality and disease risk were parallel and, in several key ways, intersecting logics that rendered the uterus useless and pathological and then informed surgeons’ practice of hysterectomy. Exploring the ways in which the uterus was envisioned and targeted in the history of medicine in Taiwan, this paper shows overlapping bio-politics in three strands of research in an East Asian context – namely women’s health, family planning and cancer prevention – and offers a case for global comparison.

The influence of a range of actors is discernible in nutrition projects during the period after the Second World War in the South Pacific. Influences include: international trends in nutritional science, changing ideas within the British establishment about state responsibility for the welfare of its citizens and the responsibility of the British Empire for its subjects; the mixture of outside scrutiny and support for projects from post-war international and multi-governmental organisations, such as the South Pacific Commission. Nutrition research and projects conducted in Fiji for the colonial South Pacific Health Service and the colonial government also sought to address territory-specific socio-political issues, especially Fiji’s complex ethnic poli,tics. This study examines the subtle ways in which nutrition studies and policies reflected and reinforced these wider socio-political trends. It suggests that historians should approach health research and policy as a patchwork of territorial, international, and regional ideas and priorities, rather than looking for a single causality.