In 1850, Ignaz Semmelweis saved lives with three words: wash your hands (2015)
pbs.org
pbs.org
Imagine watching mother after mother die in front of you. Imagine knowing the solution. Imagine the people around you ignoring it. Surely that would be enough to drive any normal man insane, or to alcoholism, or some other escape from reality
And how to no go insane and drown in Cassandra syndrome?
Uh, how so?
Privacy advocates are a bit closer to the mark but though they have much less popular voice than climate activists, they're also widely listened to (even if few organizations do much to apply their advice).
I honestly have no idea what a paper lobbyist is.
> paper lobbyist
one who wants to slow down datafication of all aspects of life. Both private and public. I took paper as a symbol.
I've never heard of paper activism as an actual cause. Interesting, and definitely less known than the others it seems.
As for paper - I suspect that written letter communication leaves a much smaller footprint than sending emails and printing on demand. However, I have no evidence of this yet.
But https://solar.lowtechmagazine.com/ has something about the rebound effect exceeding the initial savings.
In 1865, János Balassa wrote a document referring Semmelweis to a mental institution. On July 30, Ferdinand Ritter von Hebra lured him, under the pretense of visiting one of Hebra's "new Institutes", to a Viennese insane asylum located in Lazarettgasse (Landes-Irren-Anstalt in der Lazarettgasse).[60] Semmelweis surmised what was happening and tried to leave. He was severely beaten by several guards, secured in a straitjacket, and confined to a darkened cell. Apart from the straitjacket, treatments at the mental institution included dousing with cold water and administering castor oil, a laxative. He died after two weeks, on August 13, 1865, aged 47, from a gangrenous wound, due to an infection on his right hand which might have been caused by the struggle. The autopsy gave the cause of death as pyemia—blood poisoning.
He was actually one of the fathers of evidence-based medicine by counting number of death in hospitals after child-birth.
He discovered that when women where treated by doctors MORE deaths occurred than when women where treated by nurses. The reason for this might have been that the doctors also dissected corpses at university and brought germs from this when examining women.
That was the problem of the message: He postulated that his peers, the noble doctors were directly responsible for a high number of deaths. This was a message nobody wanted to hear.
Since he became more and more outspoken and angry that nobody believed him, they shut him up by luring him into an asylum where he died.
Later his methods were approved, since the young students had no bad conscience about having indirectly killed women in their career.
http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/semmelweis
He also mentions why the doctors didn't accept his findings. They simple weren't willing to accept their roles in the death of mothers.
"Doctors are gentlemen and a gentleman's hands are clean."
A search for this phrase finds many related articles:
https://www.google.com/search?q=doctors+are+gentlemen+and+a+...
The true symbol of a reputable obstetrician was to have working hands. This meant touching exposed tissue while being covered with...necrotic tissue.
The history of economic growth is a tale of cleanliness - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24021044 - Aug 2020 (47 comments)
A doctor who championed hand-washing and briefly saved lives (2015) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23802761 - July 2020 (88 comments)
Sanitation conquered disease long before vaccines or antibiotics - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22173638 - Jan 2020 (71 comments)
The Doctor Who Championed Hand-Washing and Briefly Saved Lives - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8897387 - Jan 2015 (41 comments)
Look at yourself objectively - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4438828 - Aug 2012 (77 comments)
Study: Doctors don't wash hands properly 40% of the time
https://www.upi.com/Health_News/2013/08/28/Study-Doctors-don...
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S01966...
But nitrile gloves are often used, instead, in many places, which takes much of the pressure off.
Crickets from the "real" experts on Covid.
It took hundreds of thousands of deaths for people to sort of get that it's airborne, and even now the ramifications of that -- for example, that all healthcare workers should wear N95's instead of surgical masks -- have not really been understood and accepted.
It's the same thing all over again.
How likely is it that the constant use of hand sanitizers due to the pandemic (which might stay on as a habit) has negative side effects for the population as whole or individuals, e.g. killing "good bacteria", creating resistances, weakening the immune system?
Probably great for the population and likely to increase Earth’s carrying capacity of humans, as is the case with most technological progress (hand washing, plumbing, agricultural techniques increasing food production per hectare, micronutrient fortification). We become dependent on these things and as long as they stick around as reliable infrastructure then we are good
It is important to keep in mind, however, that exposing oneself to pathogens from other humans is distinct from exposing oneself to various neutral microorganisms from the environment that help diversify your micro biome and generally make your immune system stronger. “What doesn’t kill you makes you stronger” does not apply to oneself and Ebola or HIV or even malaria in a very practical sense. Perhaps most relatable to Hacker News folks is that each infection in one’s body offers a nonzero chance of lowering one’s IQ. That should suffice as reason to avoid disease
Edit: [0] I get sick a lot more easily than they do, and uh, it took me 9 months to recover from Covid (long Covid)
But most hand soap is only antibacterial insomuch as the soap chemically binds to them and the water washes it away.
Hopefully we go back to letting things be and not requiring sterile public spaces.
tldr: it was a very radical idea and he was a difficult, unliked man. I read that as "kind of a jerk", but that's my interpretation. We might react the same way if the person you dislike for being a smartass comes with an idea that there are invisible tiny things killing people.
I think there's a lesson here, it's not enough to be right. You need to sell your ideas well. Especially if you're selling to a group that already dislike you due to previous interactions.
Alternatively, be nice to people, making it easier for them to like your ideas.
Semmelweiss didn't know what it was that killed people. He had some results that suggested a correlation between hand washing and mothers surviving. But he couldn't explain what the mechanism was. It was quite easy for the scientific establishment to dismiss his results as a peculiarity of the ward he was working on.
Since ~570 AD
I don't think using a translation of what he actually said is dumbing it down, it just makes it more accessible for readers of English.
Also, contrary to your claims about churlishness, the article states multiple times that he was a rather rude man