3 ms·

> There were doctors and surgeons against the concept of handwashing, too, but fortunately they lost. Did the thinking go something like "Every pathogen that d

> There were doctors and surgeons against the concept of handwashing, too, but fortunately they lost. Did the thinking go something like "Every pathogen that does not kill our patients only makes them stronger"?

schiffern 2y ago
The controversy predates the germ theory of disease and the concept of "pathogens." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis
immibis 2y ago
The thinking went something like "If this were true, I'd be wrong, therefore it is not true." and possibly "If this were true, I'd be responsible for killing a hundred people, therefore it is not true."
- JoshTriplett 2y ago
  Those are definitely dangerous patterns. Another dangerous one doesn't even perfunctorily start with "if this were true", but instead starts with dismissal as a perceived status-challenge ("Bah, why would we do a low-status thing?") > some doctors were offended at the suggestion that they should wash their hands and mocked him for it The common thread in all of these, though, is not embracing a fundamental mindset of "If I'm wrong I want to know that and change and improve".
mminer237 2y ago
It was more thinking that made no logical sense and was a bit of personal insult. Remember, the leading scientific theory at the time was that illness was caused by bad air. It would be the same as you suggesting to your doctor today that he wouldn't have killed his patient if he was wearing more deodorant. He would both think you are completely crazy and insulting.
- JoshTriplett 2y ago
  If you had evidence showing that it seems to work, then whether the mechanism of action was understood yet or not, they shouldn't be perceiving it as crazy or insulting; they should be doing it, and in parallel seeking to understand it. (It's also possible for a study to be flawed, but even then, the reaction should be to do better, not to react with "crazy and insulting".)

schiffern 2y ago

The controversy predates the germ theory of disease and the concept of "pathogens." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignaz_Semmelweis

immibis 2y ago

The thinking went something like "If this were true, I'd be wrong, therefore it is not true." and possibly "If this were true, I'd be responsible for killing a hundred people, therefore it is not true."

JoshTriplett 2y ago
Those are definitely dangerous patterns. Another dangerous one doesn't even perfunctorily start with "if this were true", but instead starts with dismissal as a perceived status-challenge ("Bah, why would we do a low-status thing?") > some doctors were offended at the suggestion that they should wash their hands and mocked him for it The common thread in all of these, though, is not embracing a fundamental mindset of "If I'm wrong I want to know that and change and improve".

mminer237 2y ago

It was more thinking that made no logical sense and was a bit of personal insult. Remember, the leading scientific theory at the time was that illness was caused by bad air. It would be the same as you suggesting to your doctor today that he wouldn't have killed his patient if he was wearing more deodorant. He would both think you are completely crazy and insulting.

JoshTriplett 2y ago
If you had evidence showing that it seems to work, then whether the mechanism of action was understood yet or not, they shouldn't be perceiving it as crazy or insulting; they should be doing it, and in parallel seeking to understand it. (It's also possible for a study to be flawed, but even then, the reaction should be to do better, not to react with "crazy and insulting".)