Plague and local response in North China, 1900-28.

Breakthroughs in international biomedical science circa 1900 meant that plague could be contained through strict quarantine regulations. These measures were successfully deployed with help from local governments during outbreaks of pneumonic plague in Manchuria (1910-11), Shanxi (1918), and elsewhere in North China. This containment shows the effectiveness of uniting international knowledge and local cooperation in disaster response. Yet, in later outbreaks in similar locations, control measures identical to those instituted a decade earlier were rejected, and plague spread largely unchecked. Historical case studies of the control and spread of infectious disease in North China reveal the complexities of the relationship between global knowledge and its broader, local integration, variation in what constitutes effective 'local' cooperation in adopting international knowledge, and the paramount importance of the locality to the landscape of disaster response. History can reveal critical issues in localisation of disaster response still salient today.

The Formation of Shanghai Customs Quarantine System based on Medical Inspection: Acceptance and Transformation between England-Shanghai-Joseon from 1872 to 1894.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the process of establishing a quarantine system based on medical inspection by Shanghai Customs. England was the first to introduce a quarantine system based on medical inspection during the nineteenth century; with the majority of the Shanghai Customs administration being English, this system was able to be adopted with ease, and it was later transformed and accepted in Joseon. This paper further investigates the details of the actual medical inspection conducted by the Customs Medical Officer (CMO) who worked at the forefront of the actual quarantine as a medical inspector. In the nineteenth century, International Sanitary Conferences were held in Paris, Vienna, and Constantinople to discuss the process of quarantine and public health. Furthermore, the Public Health Act was passed in England in 1872. This Act established port sanitary authorities in each of England's ports to carry out medical inspections. This medical inspection enabled healthy and infected people to be separated from each other instead of conventional isolation. The duties of the CMO would consist of boarding any incoming ship to check for any infected people. Any infected persons would then be sent to a non-quarantine hospital, and the ship was sanitized. This concept of quarantine based on medical inspection was borrowed by Shanghai Customs. The unique political situation in Shanghai, which consisted of multiple imperial concessions, necessitated the adaptation of England's medical quarantine concept to suit the special environment in which the Shanghai Customs was located, and by 1875, the Shanghai Customs quarantine medical inspection system was established. In this system, patients found in the Customs quarantine medical inspection were sent to a non-quarantine hospital in the settlement. Due to the extraterritoriality, the extent of the authority of the Customs Medical Officer was dependent on agreements with the possibility to be granted a one-time or temporary position after conferring with the Shanghai local government and consuls in each country. The Treaty Ports of Joseon were similar to Shanghai with regards to the presence of the Customs system alongside different settlements. The Joseon ports went through another transformation when the Commissioner of Shanghai Customs, H. F. Merrill, who also served as the Chief Commissioner of Seoul, accepted the Shanghai Customs' modified concept of medical inspection in 1887. The process of acceptance and transformation of the medical quarantine concept leading to the 'England-Shanghai-Joseon' connection shows that the concept of medical quarantine in the nineteenth century spread from England to Joseon through Shanghai Customs as a medium.

The Story of the plague in the Maritime Republic of Genoa (Italy) (1656-1657): An innovative public health system and an efficacious method of territorial health organization.

Introduction: With the recent COVID-19 pandemic, the terms quarantine, contagion and infection have again become part of our everyday speech, prompting historians to reflect on the settings in which they were originally used and to make comparisons with the present time. How did people cope with epidemics in the past? What measures were taken? Objectives: Here, we analyse the institutional response of the Republic of Genoa to a calamity that shook the city - the plague of 1656-1657. In doing so, we focus particularly on the public health measures implemented, as recorded also in unpublished and archival documents. Discussion: In order to tighten control over the population, Genoa was divided into 20 zones, each of which was placed under the authority of a Commissioner endowed with criminal jurisdiction. The Commissioners' duties concerned the spheres of public health, public order and those tasks which today we would assign to "civil protection". Through the official documentation and the trial records kept by the Chancellor of one of these zones, we can shed light on the Commissioners' everyday activities and assess the impact of the public health measures on the population. Conclusions: The 17th century plague in Genoa provides us with an important testimony of a well-organised and structured public health policy - an institutional response involving the adoption of efficacious measures of safety and prevention in the field of hygiene and public health. From the historical-social, normative and public health perspectives, this meaningful experience highlights the organisation of a large port city, which was at the time a flourishing commercial and financial hub.

[Isolation and distancing during the plague epidemics]. / Isolatie en afstand houden in tijden van pest.

The plague epidemics wiped out large parts of the city population from the 15th to the 17th century in the Netherlands. The plague bacterium (Yersinia pestis) is transmitted to humans through infected rats and fleas and has been transferred from China to Europe via the trade routes over land and sea. Meetings were banned, plague victims were isolated at home or in pest houses, and ships quarantined. In the densely populated, poor neighborhoods of the cities, however, isolation and keeping distance were not feasible, which allowed the plague to rapidly spread. The lessons we have learned from the plague epidemics are timeless. Isolation, keeping your distance and quarantine were key principles and now apply again in the approach to the current Covid-19 pandemic. How effective these measures are depends on the social context in which they are applied.

Quarantine as a tool of epidemic fight.

Until the 19th century, the factor causing epidemics was not known, and the escape from a place where it occurred as well as isolation of patients was considered to be the only effective way to avoid illness and death. Quarantine in a sense similar to modern times was used in 1377 in Ragusa, today's Dubrovnik, during the plague epidemic. It was the first administratively imposed procedure in the world's history. It was later used in Venice and other rich port cities in the Mediterranean. On the territory of today's Poland, quarantine measures were used by the so-called Mayor of the Air - LukaszDrewno in 1623 during the plague epidemic in Warsaw. The quarantine left its mark on all areas of human activity. It affected all humanity in a way that is underestimated today. Throughout history, it has been described and presented visually. It is omnipresent in the world literature, art and philosophy. However, the isolation and closure of cities, limiting trade, had an impact on the economic balance, and the dilemma between the choice of inhabitants' health and the quality of existence, i.e. their wealth, has been the subject of discussions since the Middle Ages. Since the end of the 19th century, quarantine has lost its practical meaning. The discovery of bacteria and a huge development of medical and social sciences allowed limiting its range. In the 20th century isolation and quarantine no longer had a global range, because the ability to identify factors causing the epidemic, knowledge about the incubation period, carrier, infectiousness, enabled the rational determination of its duration and territorial range. The modern SARS COV 2 pandemic has resulted in a global quarantine on a scale unprecedented for at least three hundred years. The aim of this paper is to present the history of quarantine from its beginning to the present day, including its usefulness as an epidemiological tool.

Learning from the past in the COVID-19 era: rediscovery of quarantine, previous pandemics, origin of hospitals and national healthcare systems, and ethics in medicine.

After the dramatic coronavirus outbreak at the end of 2019 in Wuhan, Hubei province, China, on 11 March 2020, a pandemic was declared by the WHO. Most countries worldwide imposed a quarantine or lockdown to their citizens, in an attempt to prevent uncontrolled infection from spreading. Historically, quarantine is the 40-day period of forced isolation to prevent the spread of an infectious disease. In this educational paper, a historical overview from the sacred temples of ancient Greece-the cradle of medicine-to modern hospitals, along with the conceive of healthcare systems, is provided. A few foods for thought as to the conflict between ethics in medicine and shortage of personnel and financial resources in the coronavirus disease 2019 era are offered as well.

"Debordering" public health: the changing patterns of health border in modern Europe.

According to David Fidler, the governance of infectious diseases evolved from the mid-nineteenth to the twenty-first century as a series of institutional arrangements: the International Sanitary Regulations (non-interference and disease control at borders), the World Health Organization vertical programs (malaria and smallpox eradication campaigns), and a post-Westphalian regime standing beyond state-centrism and national interest. But can international public health be reduced to such a Westphalian image? We scrutinize three strategies that brought health borders into prominence: pre-empting weak states (eastern Mediterranean in the nineteenth century); preventing the spread of disease through nation-building (Macedonian public health system in the 1920s); and debordering the fight against epidemics (1920-1921 Russian-Polish war and the Warsaw 1922 Sanitary Conference).

Debordering public health: the changing patterns of health border in modern Europe / Tirando as fronteiras da saúde pública: mudanças nos padrões de fronteira sanitária na Europa moderna

Abstract According to David Fidler, the governance of infectious diseases evolved from the mid-nineteenth to the twenty-first century as a series of institutional arrangements: the International Sanitary Regulations (non-interference and disease control at borders), the World Health Organization vertical programs (malaria and smallpox eradication campaigns), and a post-Westphalian regime standing beyond state-centrism and national interest. But can international public health be reduced to such a Westphalian image? We scrutinize three strategies that brought health borders into prominence: pre-empting weak states (eastern Mediterranean in the nineteenth century); preventing the spread of disease through nation-building (Macedonian public health system in the 1920s); and debordering the fight against epidemics (1920-1921 Russian-Polish war and the Warsaw 1922 Sanitary Conference).

Resumo Segundo David Fidler, a gestão de doenças infecciosas entre meados do século XIX e e o XXI guiou-se por uma série de acordos institucionais: Regulamento Sanitário Internacional (não interferência e controle de doenças em fronteiras), programas verticais da OMS (campanhas de erradicação da malária e varíola), e posicionamento pós-vestefaliano além do estado-centrismo e interesse nacional. Mas pode a saúde pública internacional ser reduzida à tal imagem vestefaliana? Examinamos três estratégias que destacaram as fronteiras sanitárias: prevenção em estados vulneráveis (Mediterrâneo oriental, século XIX); prevenção à disseminação de doenças via construção nacional (sistema público de saúde macedônico, anos 1920); remoção de fronteiras no combate às epidemias (guerra polaco-soviética, 1920-1921 e Conferência Sanitária de Varsóvia, 1922).

COVID-19 and the ethics of quarantine: a lesson from the Eyam plague.

The recent outbreak of the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus is posing many different challenges to local communities, directly affected by the pandemic, and to the global community, trying to find how to respond to this threat in a larger scale. The history of the Eyam Plague, read in light of Ross Upshur's Four Principles for the Justification of Public Health Intervention, and of the Siracusa Principles on the Limitation and Derogation Provisions in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, could provide useful guidance in navigating the complex ethical issues that arise when quarantine measures need to be put in place.

[From "culprits" to "victims:" the expansion and professionalization of the healthcare system in the province of Mendoza in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century]. / De "culpables" a "víctimas": expansión y profesionalización del sistema de salud en la provincia Mendoza a fines del siglo XIX y principios del XX.

From the late 19th century to the beginning of the 20th, the province of Mendoza presented problematic sanitary conditions due to rapid demographic and urban growth, the scarcity of public services, and the poor state of the old colonial city (destroyed by the 1861 earthquake), which facilitated the spread of various infectious diseases. The objective of this article is to inquire into the ways in which the healthcare system in the province of Mendoza both expanded and became increasingly professionalized from the late 19th to early 20th century. We explore how these factors, along with the predominant social representations of disease that permeated the discourses of governing elites, influenced public policy aimed at combating the diseases of the time. To that end, we consulted a wide range of written documents and photographic material that allowed us to analyze changes in discourse as well as public policy.

Entre fines del siglo XIX y comienzos del XX, la provincia de Mendoza presentaba un estado sanitario marcado por el crecimiento demográfico y urbanístico, la escasez de los servicios públicos y la destrucción de la antigua ciudad colonial como consecuencia del terremoto de 1861, lo que propiciaba un ambiente favorable para el desarrollo de diversas enfermedades infectocontagiosas. El objetivo de este artículo es indagar cómo se fue profesionalizando y expandiendo el sistema de salud en la provincia de Mendoza a fines del siglo XIX e inicios del XX, y cómo esos factores, junto con las representaciones sobre la enfermedad que predominaban en el discurso de la elite gobernante, incidieron en las políticas públicas para combatir las dolencias de la época. Para ello se consultaron diversos documentos escritos y fotográficos que permitieron analizar las modificaciones del discurso y las políticas públicas implementadas.

Cholera epidemic and quarantine of open ports in Joseon in 1886.

In 1886, cholera was prevalent nationwide in Joseon. This year was not yet the time when the Joseon government officially overhauled quarantine rules to go into effect. Thus, quarantine efforts to prevent cholera varied depending on each of the three opening ports in the Joseon Dynasty. In Wonsan, officials of the three countries(Joseon, Japan and Qing) discussed ways to deal with cholera, and quarantine activities were carried out smoothly. On the other hand, Busan underwent friction and conflict between the parties over the implementation of quarantine rules within the region. When the Japanese consulate said that it would establish quarantine rules first and implement them, officials from various countries, including the Joseon Dynasty, strongly protested against the movement, saying that they did not reach prior consent. On top of that, economic interests were also affecting circumstances of port trade. In Incheon, there were differences between the home country and the local consulate over the urgent issue to be dealt with locally and the legal principles of applying the treaty. Since consular officials were not authorized to establish quarantine rules, the situation was settled into cancellation of the rules already issued there. The Japanese consul working at each port in the Joseon Dynasty suggested specific rules to develop quarantine activities. At this point, we can read Japan's intention to preempt the standard of future quarantine inspections. The enforcement of quarantine rules, however, was a matter that required consent from the Joseon official Gamri, the Acting Commissioner of the Joseon Maritime Customs and diplomats from each country. Furthermore, they had to go through the process of obtaining review and approval from their home countries if there were any problems in the operation of the treaty. The establishment and implementation of quarantine rules were complicated by interests of various players in each country concerning protection of their own citizens. Even though it was timely and the purpose of implementation was good, it could not follow through the quarantine rules as proposed by the Japanese consul at the opening port. The accumulation of quarantine experience and information at each port of Joseon in 1886 provided the foundation for the Joseon government to move toward to establish quarantine rules and implement them with the consent of each country in the following year.

An Analysis of the United States and United Kingdom Smallpox Epidemics (1901-5) - The Special Relationship that Tested Public Health Strategies for Disease Control.

At the end of the nineteenth century, the northern port of Liverpool had become the second largest in the United Kingdom. Fast transatlantic steamers to Boston and other American ports exploited this route, increasing the risk of maritime disease epidemics. The 1901-3 epidemic in Liverpool was the last serious smallpox outbreak in Liverpool and was probably seeded from these maritime contacts, which introduced a milder form of the disease that was more difficult to trace because of its long incubation period and occurrence of undiagnosed cases. The characteristics of these epidemics in Boston and Liverpool are described and compared with outbreaks in New York, Glasgow and London between 1900 and 1903. Public health control strategies, notably medical inspection, quarantine and vaccination, differed between the two countries and in both settings were inconsistently applied, often for commercial reasons or due to public unpopularity. As a result, smaller smallpox epidemics spread out from Liverpool until 1905. This paper analyses factors that contributed to this last serious epidemic using the historical epidemiological data available at that time. Though imperfect, these early public health strategies paved the way for better prevention of imported maritime diseases.