GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
  • BRESALIER, MICHAEL  (1)
  • History  (1)
Material
Person/Organisation
Language
Years
FID
Subjects(RVK)
  • 1
    Online Resource
    Online Resource
    Cambridge University Press (CUP) ; 2014
    In:  The British Journal for the History of Science Vol. 47, No. 2 ( 2014-06), p. 305-334
    In: The British Journal for the History of Science, Cambridge University Press (CUP), Vol. 47, No. 2 ( 2014-06), p. 305-334
    Abstract: This paper examines the successful campaign in Britain to develop canine distemper vaccine between 1922 and 1933. The campaign mobilized disparate groups around the common cause of using modern science to save the nation's dogs from a deadly disease. Spearheaded by landed patricians associated with the country journal The Field , and funded by dog owners and associations, it relied on collaborations with veterinary professionals, government scientists, the Medical Research Council (MRC) and the commercial pharmaceutical house the Burroughs Wellcome Company (BWC). The social organization of the campaign reveals a number of important, yet previously unexplored, features of interwar science and medicine in Britain. It depended on a patronage system that drew upon a large base of influential benefactors and public subscriptions. Coordinated by the Field Distemper Fund, this system was characterized by close relationships between landed elites and their social networks with senior science administrators and researchers. Relations between experts and non-experts were crucial, with high levels of public engagement in all aspects of research and vaccine development. At the same time, experimental and commercial research supported under the campaign saw dynamic interactions between animal and human medicine, which shaped the organization of the MRC's research programme and demonstrated the value of close collaboration between veterinary and medical science, with the dog as a shared object and resource. Finally, the campaign made possible the translation of ‘laboratory’ findings into field conditions and commercial products. Rather than a unidirectional process, translation involved negotiations over the very boundaries of the ‘laboratory’ and the ‘field’, and what constituted a viable vaccine. This paper suggests that historians reconsider standard historical accounts of the nature of patronage, the role of animals, and the interests of landed elites in interwar British science and medicine.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0007-0874 , 1474-001X
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: Cambridge University Press (CUP)
    Publication Date: 2014
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2017943-1
    SSG: 24
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...