Antall József szerk.: Orvostörténeti közlemények 89-91. (Budapest, 1980)

TANULMÁNYOK - Magyar, Imre: Belgyógyászati irányzatok Magyarországon a két világháború között (angol nyelven)

at congresses abroad. Contradicting general belief, Hungarian internal medicine in the first half of the interwar period did not slavishly imitate the medicine of Germany. Outstanding German internist were, naturally held in great esteem in Hungary, too, but it was just Korányi and his school to orient our young internists more and more toward French, British, Swedish, Dutch, Belgian and Italian schools of medicine. Browsing only among copies of Orvosi Hetilap, one could learn about the American children's aid campaigns [55], about the Rockefeller Foundation [56]. J. Bókay reported on a congress of pathology in Rome [57], while K. Engel on an Italian congress of internal medicine [58]. The paper celebrated the centenary of Pasteur [59]. Verzár gave an account of the Physiological Congress held in Edinburgh [27] with a particular emphasis on Pavlov's celebrated lecture. Á. Herczeg's excellent Weekly Chronicles discussed almost entirely western events. The paper commemorated Emmet Holt's death [60]. G. Takáts published a letter from America [61, 62]. An account was given of a woman-doctors' congress in London [63]. Thirty Hungarian phthisiologists participated in a medical postgraduate course in Davos [64]. Again G. Takáts reported on the Mayo Clinic [62], while K. Berde on the Hôpital St. Louis in Paris [65] and Huzly on the medical training at the Sorbonne [66]. G. Farkas commemorated William Bayliss [68]. S. Rejtő reviewed the state of otology in Scandinavia. All this appeared before 1924. In 1925 letters, first from Paris then from Madrid were published by D. Miskolczy [70]. B. Johann gave an account of the health organization of Yugoslavia [71]. It was again G. Takáts to report on American anaesthesia apparatuses [72]. Verzár published his Langley memorial address [73]. Let us stop now the enumeration of articles with western implications. A good review section was also to be found in Orvosi Hetilap surveying, however, only German papers. Nevertheless, in the 30s, when the review section was taken over by Gömöri and Binder, American and British reviews also appeared. The first British book to be reviewed in detail was interestingly enough on the teaching of preventive medicine by Tomcsik in 1934 [74]. There was no evidence of German partiality which developed as a consequence of the political situation in the second half of the 30s. The state of internal medicine was improved by the great number of modern new hospitals, e. g. the still functioning Péterfy Sándor Street Hospital, the Bajcsy-Zsilinszky Hospital, the recently evacuated Költői Anna Hospital, the beautiful Kútvölgyi State Hospital and the Tétényi Street Hospital. The new hospitals bridged an old gap but they still were built and were also regarded as modern ones in their own time. However, policlinics in Budapest and, in general, health institutions in the country were not sufficiently developed. Patient care, as a matter of course, also affects the state of internal medicine. Workers' insurance having as many opposers as supporters was introduced like soon also the insurance of clerks employed by private firms and of civil servants. All this happened amidst great struggles because these instutions were, as a matter of fact lucrative ones, the positive economic balance of which was primarily based on the exploitation of physicians. "Humanitarian social politics it is

—one may read ironically in Orvosi Hetilap [75]—in which humanism and sacrifice are expected from the physician only." In the background of medical conditions, this being valid for internal medicine as well as for other specialists, there is the incredible impoverishment of physicians. This situation is inconceivable today: Masses of unemployed physicians were starving and were forced to undertake manual labour. At the same time when peasantry