Antall József szerk.: Orvostörténeti közlemények 97-99. (Budapest, 1982)
TANULMÁNYOK - Codell Carter, K: Semmelweis esetleges hatása Kari Mayrhoferra és a tizenkilencedik századi etiológiai elméletek kidolgozóira (angol nyelven)
finding vibrions in secretions from a much lower percentage of healthy women. He claimed that the vibrions were, therefore, a universal necessary (but not sufficient) cause of puerperal fever. Fischer notes that Mayrhofer's "investigations of the germ content of lochial secretion and of the etiology of puerperal fever, which followed Pasteur's work and preceded Lister's discoveries, together with the circumstance that, precisely in Vienna, he was never properly recognized, earned him the title of a second Semmelweis." 13 Erna Lesky also mentions Mayrhofer in her monumental book, The Vienna Medical School of the Nineteenth Century. She points out that "with his investigations of the germ content of the lochia, Mayrhofer took up the problem of puerperal diseases at the point at which Semmelweis had abandoned it." u Lesky also refers to Mayrhofer as "the second Semmelweis." But neither Fischer nor Lesky suggests that Mayrhofer was directly influenced by Semmelweis. Indeed, so far, no one seems to have seem more than an accidental relation between Semmelweis and Mayrhofen 15 And, in fact, Mayrhofer himself never mentioned Semmelweis in his publications on puerperal fever. It is nearly inconceivable that Mayrhofer did not know of Semmelweis's work. He became assistant in the first clinic in 1862—just two years after the appearance of the Aetiology. While the Aetiology may not have received the attention it deserved, it was reviewed in obstetrical literature and frequently mentioned or discussed in obstetrical and in general medical literature. 10 Prior to entering the obstetrical clinic, Mayrhofer had worked for Ferdinand Hebra who had first reported Semmelweis's results in 1847 and who remained Semmelweis's close friend. 17 Throughout the three essays, but especially in the last, there is unmistakable internal evidence that Mayrhofer was influenced by Semmelweis. He occasionally used language that is reminiscent of Semmelweis. 18 He knew and used several items of evidence that Semmelweis used but that had been challenged by Semmelweis's critics. 19 In harmony with Semmelweis, but against the more common etiological theories, Mayrhofer observed that "it is now universally assumed that specific puerperal processes can only come about through the operation of some particu10 Fischer, op. cit., note 11 above, pp. 352f. 14 Erna Lesky, The Vienna Medical School of the Nineteenth Century, Baltimore and London, Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976, p. 190. The English translation of Lesky's book gives Mayrhofer's birthplace as Styria ( Steiermark ) whereas in fact it was Steyr. 15 Mayrhofer isn't even mentioned in the standard biographies of Semmelweis, nor are his works mentioned in Murphy's bibliography of the Semmelweis literature. Frank J. Murphy "Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis (1818-1865): An Annotated Bibliography," Bulletin of the History of Medicine, 1946, 20 : 653-707. 16 For a list of the more important reviews and of some (but by no means all) of the essays and books in which the Aetiology was mentioned in the decade following its publication, see ibid., pp. 665-673. The extent of this partial list shows clearly enough that anyone working in obstetrics during that decade must certainly have known of Semmelweis and his work. 17 Fischer, op. cit., note 11 above, p. 352. 18 For example, compare Mayrhofer's criteria for establishing causality ("Vorkommen von Vibrionen," op. cit., note 12 above, p. 19) with Semmelweis's discussion of the criteria that had been proposed by Josef Hamernik (Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis, Die Aetiologie, der Begriff und die Prophylaxis des Kindbettfiebers, reprinted from the 1861 edition, New York and London, Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1966, p. 418). Both Mayrhofer ("Zur Frage nach der Aetiologie," op. cit., note 12 above, p. 134) and Semmelweis (Aetiologie, p. 212) assert that prevailing accounts attempt to explain the unknown by the unknown. 19 For example, he uses the facts that first births and difficult deliveries were more dangerous than ordinary deliveries and that so-called street deliveries were less dangerous than deliveries in the hospital. "Zur Frage nach der Aetiologie", op. cit., note 12 above, pp. 125, 128.
