• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

[塞麦尔维斯——一个善于思考的人。科学史上的教训]

[Semmelweis - a contemplating human. Scientific historical lessons].

作者信息

Gazda István

机构信息

Magyar Tudománytörténeti és Egészségtudományi Intézet Budapest, Bem József u. 8., 1027.

出版信息

Orv Hetil. 2018 Jul;159(26):1055-1064. doi: 10.1556/650.2018.31174.

DOI:10.1556/650.2018.31174
PMID:29936856
Abstract

In this article we examine why Semmelweis's seemingly simple, logical and practical discovery was categorically dismissed by the majority of his contemporaries, and why even many years after his death it was accepted with such reservation. We invoke wherever possible Semmelweis's own words citing from the series of articles appearing in the 'Orvosi Hetilap' [Hungarian Medical Weekly Journal] published in 1858 in Hungary, and also from the German language summary of the Journal published in 1860. We came to the conclusion that although Semmelweis did everything in his power to show the causal relationship between the development of puerperal fever (childbed fever) and some infectious substance on the hands of examining doctors and medical students, this was not convincing enough. The predominant theory at the time held that infection was caused by miasma transmitted in the air and therefore stubbornly precluded any notion of infectious matter physically transmitted on unclean hands. We also concluded that the causal sequence observed by Semmelweis was missing an essential empirical element: visual proof of the infectious agent he correctly postulated as physically transmitted. Visually demonstrating the presence of the infectious agent by means of a microscope would have made his case. This finally did occur but only two years after Semmelweis's death. Had the renowned Hungarian obstetrician realized the significance of taking advantage of the opportunity afforded by Dávid Gruby who was conducting experiments in the same town, a more convincing argument could have been made for his theory. In the 1840s and 1850s, Dávid Gruby was experimenting with various microscopic techniques and their application with success in Vienna before continuing his work in France. Gruby's work, especially that of microscopic observations of tissues, received international acceptance. Therefore, the involvement of Gruby and his work with microscopes to support Semmelweis's observations would most probably have forestalled much of the criticism and rejection his theory was initially awarded (among which perhaps Virchow's rejection proved the most damaging). Had Semmelweis utilized microscopic techniques, he would have been celebrated among the first to discover bacterial pathogens, contributing to the development of the currently predominant germ theory. Failure to utilize the microscope was the root cause leading to the tragedy of Semmelweis's rejection by the medical establishment of the time. Despite the increasing numbers of scientists utilizing the microscope at the University of Pest, offered to corroborate his daims with microscopic observations. Efforts have been made have since been to rehabilitate him as the key figure who not only discovered the method of transmission of infectious disease, but also implemented measures of prevention. Elevating him among the ranks of the ten greatest doctors who ever lived is certainly recognition due, but sadly denied to him in his lifetime. Orv Hetil. 2018; 159(26): 1055-1064.

摘要

在本文中,我们探讨了为什么塞麦尔维斯看似简单、合乎逻辑且实用的发现被他的大多数同代人断然否定,以及为什么即使在他去世多年后,人们对其发现的接受仍有所保留。我们尽可能引用了塞麦尔维斯本人的话,这些话出自1858年在匈牙利发表于《匈牙利医学周刊》(Orvosi Hetilap)上的一系列文章,以及1860年该杂志的德语摘要。我们得出的结论是,尽管塞麦尔维斯竭尽全力展示产褥热(产后发热)的发展与检查医生和医学生手上的某些传染源之间的因果关系,但这还不够有说服力。当时的主流理论认为,感染是由空气中传播的瘴气引起的,因此坚决排除了不洁手上物理传播传染源的任何概念。我们还得出结论,塞麦尔维斯观察到的因果序列缺少一个关键的实证要素:他正确假设为物理传播的传染源的视觉证据。通过显微镜直观地证明传染源的存在本可以支持他的观点。这最终确实发生了,但却是在塞麦尔维斯去世两年后。如果这位著名的匈牙利产科医生意识到利用同在一个城镇进行实验的大卫·格鲁比提供的机会的重要性,他的理论本可以有更有说服力的论据。在19世纪40年代和50年代,大卫·格鲁比在维也纳成功地试验了各种显微镜技术及其应用,之后在法国继续他的工作。格鲁比的工作,尤其是对组织的显微镜观察,得到了国际认可。因此,格鲁比及其显微镜工作对塞麦尔维斯观察结果的支持很可能会避免他的理论最初遭到的许多批评和拒绝(其中也许维尔肖的拒绝造成的损害最大)。如果塞麦尔维斯利用了显微镜技术,他很可能会成为最早发现细菌病原体的人之一,为当前占主导地位的细菌学说的发展做出贡献。未能利用显微镜是导致塞麦尔维斯被当时的医学界拒绝这一悲剧的根本原因。尽管佩斯大学越来越多的科学家使用显微镜,愿意用显微镜观察来证实他的说法。此后人们一直在努力恢复他作为不仅发现传染病传播方法,还实施预防措施的关键人物的地位。将他提升到有史以来最伟大的十位医生之列当然是他应得的认可,但遗憾的是他在世时被剥夺了这一认可。《匈牙利医学周刊》。2018年;159(26):1055 - 1064。

相似文献

1
[Semmelweis - a contemplating human. Scientific historical lessons].[塞麦尔维斯——一个善于思考的人。科学史上的教训]
Orv Hetil. 2018 Jul;159(26):1055-1064. doi: 10.1556/650.2018.31174.
2
[Ignác Semmelweis and the Hungarian Medical Weekly Journal].伊格纳兹·塞麦尔维斯与《匈牙利医学周刊》
Orv Hetil. 2018 Jul;159(26):1065-1070. doi: 10.1556/650.2018.31086.
3
Vindicating a traduced genius: Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis (1818-1865).为被诽谤的天才辩护:伊格纳兹·菲利普·塞麦尔维斯(1818-1865)。
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Sep;225(3):310-324. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2021.06.054. Epub 2021 Jun 16.
4
[The savior of mothers and newborns, whom we shall always be proud of: Ignác Semmelweis (1818-1865). One who defeated the disease, yet could not convince the people, Doctor of Medical Sciences and Surgery, Master of Obstetrics, Professor of Theoretical and Practical Obstetrics at the Pest Royal Hungarian University of Sciences].[我们将永远为之骄傲的母婴救星:伊格纳兹·塞麦尔维斯(1818 - 1865)。一位战胜了疾病却无法说服众人的医学博士、外科硕士、产科学硕士、匈牙利佩斯皇家科学大学理论与实践产科学教授]
Orv Hetil. 2018 Jul;159(26):1041-1054. doi: 10.1556/650.2018.31153.
5
Rediscovering Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis (1818-1865).重新发现伊格纳兹·菲利普·塞麦尔维斯(1818-1865)。
Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2019 Jan;220(1):26-39. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2018.11.1084. Epub 2018 Nov 13.
6
What happened at Vienna's Allgemeines Krankenhaus after Semmelweis's contract as Assistant in the First Maternity Division was terminated?在塞麦尔维斯作为第一产科病房助理的合同被终止后,维也纳综合医院发生了什么?
Epidemiol Infect. 2017 Jul;145(10):2144-2151. doi: 10.1017/S0950268817000875. Epub 2017 May 2.
7
[200th birth anniversary of Ignatius Philipp Semmelweis].[伊格纳兹·菲利普·塞麦尔维斯诞辰200周年]
Acta Med Hist Adriat. 2018 Jul 17;16(1):9-18.
8
Semmelweis and the aetiology of puerperal sepsis 160 years on: an historical review.160年后的塞麦尔维斯与产褥热病因学:历史回顾
Epidemiol Infect. 2008 Jan;136(1):1-9. doi: 10.1017/S0950268807008746. Epub 2007 Jun 7.
9
[Surviving handwritten signatures of Ignác Semmelweis].[伊格纳兹·塞麦尔维斯留存的手写签名]
Orvostort Kozl. 2015;61(1-4):43-56.
10
A Note on Semmelweis's Animal Experiments and Their Historical Significance.关于塞梅尔魏斯动物实验及其历史意义的说明。
J Hist Med Allied Sci. 2020 Oct 1;75(4):383-407. doi: 10.1093/jhmas/jraa039.

引用本文的文献

1
What were the historical reasons for the resistance to recognizing airborne transmission during the COVID-19 pandemic?在 COVID-19 大流行期间,为什么人们对承认空气传播存在阻力?历史原因是什么?
Indoor Air. 2022 Aug;32(8):e13070. doi: 10.1111/ina.13070.