History of Tyres...from Google gearch

History of Tires
Charles Goodyear invented vulcanized rubber in 1844 that was later used for the first tires.
More of This Feature • History of Gas Fueled Cars Related Resources • Automobile History • Bicycle History • Pneumatic Devices • History of Rubber Charles Goodyear invented vulcanized rubber in 1844 that was later used for tires. In 1888, John Dunlop invented the air-filled or pneumatic tires, however, his were for bicycles.  In 1895, André Michelin was the first person to use pneumatic tires on an automobile, however, not successfully.  In 1911, Philip Strauss invented the first successful tire, which was a combination tire and air filled inner tube. Strauss' company the Hardman Tire & Rubber Company marketed the tires.  In 1903, P.W. Litchfield of the Goodyear Tire Company patented the first tubeless tire, however, it was never commercially exploited until the 1954 Packard.  In 1904, mountable rims were introduced that allowed drivers to fix their own flats. In 1908, Frank Seiberling invented grooved tires with improved road traction.  In 1910, B.F. Goodrich Company invented longer life tires by adding carbon to the rubber.  Goodrich also invented the first synthetic rubber tires in 1937 made of a patented substance called Chemigum. Pneumatic Tyre (Tire) John Boyd Dunlop (1840-1921) was a Scottish veterinarian and the recognized inventor of the first practical pneumatic or inflatable tyre/tire. His patent was for abicycle tire, granted in 1888. However, Robert William Thomson (1822 - 1873) invented the actual first vulcanised rubber pneumatic tire. Thomson patented his pneumatic tire in 1845, his invention worked well but was to costly to catch on. Dunlop's tire patented in 1888 did, and so he received the most recognition. William Thomson also patented a fountain pen (1849) and a steam traction engine (1867).

THE DEVELOPEMENT OF TUBELESS TYRES

On this day in 1947, the B.F. Goodrich Company of Akron, Ohio, announces it has developed a tubeless tire, a technological innovation that would make automobiles safer and more efficient.

Pneumatic tires--or tires filled with pressurized air--were used on motor vehicles beginning in the late 1800s, when the French rubber manufacturer Michelin & Cie became the first company to develop them. For the first 60 years of their use, pneumatic tires generally relied on an inner tube containing the compressed air and an outer casing that protected the tube and provided traction. The disadvantage of this design was that if the inner tube failed--which was always a risk due to excess heat generated by friction between the tube and the tire wall--the tire would blow out immediately, causing the driver to lose control of the vehicle.

The culmination of more than three years of engineering, Goodrich's tubeless tire effectively eliminated the inner tube, trapping the pressurized air within the tire walls themselves. By reinforcing those walls, the company claimed, they were able to combine the puncture-sealing features of inner tubes with an improved ease of riding, high resistance to bruising and superior retention of air pressure. While Goodrich awaited approval from the U.S. Patent Office, the tubeless tires underwent high-speed road testing, were put in service on a fleet of taxis and were used by Ohio state police cars and a number of privately owned passenger cars.

The testing proved successful, and in 1952, Goodrich won patents for the tire's various features. Within three years, the tubeless tire came standard on most new automobiles. According to an article published in The New York Times in December 1954, "If the results of tests...prove valid in general use, the owner of a 1955 automobile can count on at least 25 per cent more mileage, easier tire changing if he gets caught on a lonely road with a leaky tire, and almost no blowouts." The article quoted Howard N. Hawkes, vice president and general manager of the tire division of the United States Rubber Company, as calling the general adoption of the tubeless tire "one of the most far-reaching changes ever to take place in the tire industry." The radial-ply tire, a tubeless model with walls made of alternating layers--also called plies--of tough rubber cord, was created by Michelin later that decade and is now considered the standard for automobiles in all developed countries.

The history of Total Hip Replacement.

The beginning: Total Hip Replacement (THR)

In the 1930s, Dr. Phillip Wiles from the Middlesex Hospital in the United Kingdom designed and implanted the first Total Hip Replacement. The records of these hip replacements were lost during the second world war, but one patient is said to still have their implant in situ more than 30 years later.

Dr. GK McKee was at the time a trainee with Wiles, and following this appointment began development of various THR designs during the 1940s and 1950s. Most of these designs were met with rapid failure.

The McKee Farrar Cemented Cobalt Chrome THR was the first widely used and successful THR from the 1960s onwards.
By the 1970s, there were three types of THR that were in common use, the McKee, Charnley and Ring types.
Over the years, there have been many experiments with different designs, different fixations, and different materials. There has been much success using metal femoral components with Polyethylene cup liners. Unfortunately, wearing of these Poly cup liners creates tiny particles of Polyethylene which triggers a response from the bodys system. As the body tries to absorb these particles, it also absorbs some of the surrounding bone, leading to component loosening. This process is called Osteolysis, and is a major cause of implant failure. With this in mind, many surgeons are leaning towards UN-Cemented systems, which are coated with a bone in-growth surface. Normally after just six weeks one can expect to see sufficient bone in-growth to allow the patient to resume a normal healthy lifestyle.

What has been shown however is that the metal alloy Cobalt Chrome has performed remarkably well in prosthetic hip surgery over the last 40+ years.

Today, THR is the most successful form of prosthetic implant surgery. Failure of below 1% per year is seen from prosthesis implanted by specialist THR centres. Failure rates as high as 9% at 5 years can be seen from implants carried out by general hospitals, and an average 27% of patients have a poor long term outcome (Trent regional Arthroplasty study).

THR has proven to be very successful in the more mature & elderly patient group, however it has performed unreasonably poor in the younger , more active patient group. A different approach was necessary, and many believe Hip Resurfacing to be the answer to the problem.

The future: Hip Resurfacing

Sir John Charnley carried out the first Hip Resurfacing in the 1950s. He used Teflon bearing surfaces, which unfortunately wore out within two years of implantation. This was not a failure in concept, but rather a failure of materials. This material failure was to plague the medical community for a further 30 years.

The 1970s saw the next significant developments of hip resurfacing, with surgeons using the same materials used in the best THRs of the day. Charnley, Wagner and Amstuts converted to metal femoral heads, with Polyethylene acetabular components which were Poly-cement fixed.
55% of these resurfacings failed within 6 years after implantation. It was clear that Polyethylene could not be used in part of the bearing material.

In 1989 in the United Kingdom, it was decided to trial a new bearing material combination, which used the same material in Resurfacing as what had been successfully used in THR for more than 30 years.
The first implantation was carried out in February 1991. Various fixation methods were tried, and after 3 years it was clear that the best option was:
1.A cement fixed Chrome Cobalt femoral component,
2. Along with an un-cemented, Hydroxyapetite (HA) coated Chrome Cobalt acetabular component.

After meeting with several failures in the early stages, due to material failures, in the period March 1994 to December 1999, Ronan Traecy F.R.C.S, Eric Isbister F.R.C.S, Derek McMinn & 11 trainees performed 1720 Hybrid Resurfacings.
From 1720 implantations, there were just 17 failures.

Recent results for the 10 year period (1991-2001) should be released in early 2002.

These results look very promising.
There are now more than 70 surgeons performing the Birmingham Hip resurfacing (BHR) in the U.K alone. More than 12 in Belgium, 15 in Germany, and many other surgeons from south Africa to Australia to Japan.

There are also other similar forms of resurfacings being implanted such as the U.S produced Conserve Plus (C+) device.


Although in many countries Resurfacing is still in its trial phase, there are countries such as Belgium, where resurfacing is rapidly becoming the standard procedure for hip replacement surgery.
Whilst there I met several people that had the BHR resurfacing, and just considered it 'the norm'.

So why is Resurfacing a better option for many people needing hip surgery?

There are many reasons why Resurfacing seems to be better than THR for many patients. The simple survival & longetivity statistics quoted above are reason enough in themselves.

If the failure rate of a resurfacing is less than 2percent at 9 years, compared to the results of THRs implanted over the same period, doesn't it make sense to at least have a resurfacing as a time buying product, to gain extra years before a primary THR is necessary. Infact there are many who beleive that a resurfacing could lastmore than 20 years, or even a whole lifetime.

That brings us to the main drawback of resurfacing... The fact that it is a new procedure, and is lacking the long term result data, compared to THR surgery. The truth is, nobody knows how long a resurfacing should last, and even if they did, much depends on the individual, the kind of activities they do after surgery, the health problem they had making surgery necessary, and a whole range of other factors.


Some reasons that I personally beleive that resurfacing is better are as follows.

1. The whole implant is anatomically shaped, and after implantation, mimicks almost exactly a natural hip.

2. The surgical procedure is much less invasive. In THR it is necessary to totally remove the femoral neck and the femoral head. Considering that most patient requiring surgery simply have problems with the acetabular, or the surface of the head, or the cartilage in between, isn't removing this much natural bone a little extreme if it is not necessary?

3. In Resurfacing, the neck and head are not removed. The surface of the femoral head is shaped to exactly fit the ball of the femoral side of the prosthesis. Although some bone is removed on the head itself, the area retains its natural shape and strength.

What this also means is that if in the future the Resurfacing should ever fail, conversion to a THR can be done as a straight foreward PRIMARY THR, rather than a more complicated SECONDARY THR REVISION. Therefore the patient has gained several years before the first THR, and therefore has gained several years befor a second THR must be implanted, which is a more difficult surgery & often the outcome is worse than the primary THR implantation.
(SEE THR REVISION MOVIE and THR REVISION WITH ALLOGRAFT in my favourite link section)

4. The metal baring composition of a Cast Cobalt Chrome femoral resurfacing component, with a Cast Cobalt Chrome acetabular resurfacing component is a combination that has a proven, safe 40 year history in British hip replacement surgery.

5. In a Resurfacing prosthesis, Polyethylene is not used as a baring material. Polyethylene wear debris has been proven to cause Osteolysis.

This is where the bodys own defense system releases organisms to eat away the Polyethylene debris, but unfortunately they cannot recognise these small partiacles. Even more unfortunate is that as Poly debris cannot be attacked, these organisms, having a mission to complete, attack the nearest best thing...... Your own bone!

What this normally leads to, is the bone surrounding the prosthesis been weakened, and sometimes this can allow the prosthesis to loosen. When this happens, a revision surgery is necessary to implant a new prosthesis, or refix the current prosthesis.

A large percentage of THR failures have been caused by Poly-induced Osteolysis.

6. In a Resurfacing prosthesis, normally Orthopaedic cement is not used to attach the acetabular side of the prosthesis. This cement has also been shown to lead to Osteolysis, and component loosening.
Cement is used to attach the femoral side of the prosthesis, but in 10 years of modern resurfacing surgery with a BHR, there has never been a case of femoral component loosening

A small percentage of THR failures have been linked to Cement-induced Osteolysis.
A small percentage of THR failures have been linked to loosening due to cement wear.

7. A Resurfacing Acetabulum component is normally attached to the natural acetabulum through a special bone ingrowth surface. The BHR uses a system which is actually CAST in to the component as it is made.
This ingrowth surface is known as HYDROXY APETITE.

Under a magnifying glass, the outer surface of the component appears to be covered in very small beads. Around two weeks after implantation, your body has already started growing new bone tissue which work their way in to the tiny spaces between these beads.

After around six weeks, the bone ingrowth is quite substantial, and the acetabular cup should be solidly held in place.

(The American Conserve plus device has its own ingrowth surface, which made up of Titanium beads,and are plasma sprayed on the the outer surface of the acetabular cup. There has been some speculation that because it is necessary to heat the prosthesis to a high temperature in order to attach these beads, the strength of the prosthesis is compromised. Even if this is so, i think that we must accept that the C+ device has proven itself very well so far, and any strength lost during this process is so small that it is not worth worrying about).

8. With a THR, a stem is inserted in to the femoral canal, inside the femur. This space is not hollow, but contains fat and marrow. This fat and marrow are compressed inside the femoral canal by the THR stem being forced in to position. Fat and marrow are forced out of the bone, and in to the circulatory system.
This can lead to rapid development of blood clots which can settle in the heart, brain and legs.
This can lead to a whole range of symptoms such as Deep Vein Thrombosis in the legs. This can be very dangerous, and does not necessarily happen immediately, but sometimes shows up several years after surgery.

9. Because the Resurfacing does not have a long stem, instead a short support pin which only goes through the femoral head and settles in to the neck, the risk of Deep Vein Thrombosis and blood clots is dramatically reduced.

10. Resurfacing has simillar post surgery restrictions as does a THR surgery. The first six weeks sees several restrictions being set in place such as not bending your leg more than 90 degrees from your body line, not crossing over your legs and therefore having to sleep with a large pillow between your legs to stop them crossing over in your sleep.

11. After this six week period, many patients return to a pretty much normal lifestyle. In general, after around half a year, Resurfacing patients can do almost every activity that a person with normal hips can do. Resurfacing patients can go running, jogging, mountain climbing, play tennis, squash, karate, judo, football, soccer, rugby and just about any other daily and sporting activity.

It has been recommended that Resurfacing patients DO NOT take part in activities such as Bunjee jumping and Parachuting.

John Charnleys total Hip replacementm

Sir John Charnley

Joseph Lister...Father of Antiseptic Surgery

A broken leg today is very painful. It requires medical treatment, and can be of great inconvenience to the patient during the recuperation stage. Even if the broken bone has pierced the surface of the skin, the patient has every expectation of returning to a normal healthy lifestyle.
Just 150 years ago this was not the case—the leg probably would have been amputated, and in about half of such cases the patient subsequently would have died of infection. The man whose work virtually put an end to this tragic waste of human life was Joseph Lister.

Lister’s early life

Joseph Lister was born in Upton, Essex, England, on April 5, 1827. He was the second of three children born to Joseph Jackson Lister, a very successful wine merchant and amateur scientist. Joseph Jackson Lister’s design of a microscope lens which did not distort colours opened the way for the microscope to be used as a serious scientific tool. This contribution to science resulted in Joseph Jackson Lister’s being made a Fellow of the Royal Society—the prestigious British association of experimental scientists.
The Listers were Quakers who led a quiet, simple life. Young Joseph attended Quaker schools in Hertfordshire and London, where science subjects were emphasized. Following matriculation, he obtained a Bachelor of Arts degree at the University of London in 1847. Shortly after this he contracted smallpox. When he had fully recovered, he returned to the University of London as a medical student, qualifying as a doctor in 1850. Lister obtained Bachelor’s degrees in Medicine and Surgery, and in the process won two university gold medals for his outstanding marks. Further study saw Lister easily pass the examination to become a Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons (FRCS) in 1852.

Overcoming hurdles

Modern surgery as we know it today was not able to develop until three great hurdles had been overcome. These were the control of bleeding, the control of pain, and the control of infection. In 1552, a leading French doctor, Ambroise Pare, developed and systematized the idea of tying off the ends of broken or cut blood vessels with threads called ligatures in order to minimize bleeding. The control of pain through anaesthesia was just being introduced during the time when Lister was a university student. Before this, surgery had involved agony for the struggling patient, which in turn meant that doctors had to operate as quickly as possible.
The introduction of anaesthetics opened up a new era in surgery, as doctors were now able to take the time necessary to improve their techniques. The third major hurdle, the control of infection, remained unconquered when Lister began working as a surgeon.

Recognition of research

In 1853, Lister went to Edinburgh, Scotland, to spend four weeks with Professor James Syme, who was considered to be the greatest teacher of surgery at that time. Lister soon decided to stay in Edinburgh as Syme’s assistant. Three years later, Lister married Syme’s daughter Agnes and joined her as a member of the Episcopal church. He remained a faithful member of this church for the remainder of his life. Throughout the Listers’ long and happy, but childless, marriage, Agnes was of great assistance to her husband, helping with experiments and writing up his notes.
While still a student, Lister had decided not just to practise medicine, but also to conduct research to improve medical knowledge. His early investigations explored the action of muscles in the skin and the eye, the mechanism involved in the coagulation of blood, and the role played by blood vessels in the early stages of infection. Lister's research required frequent use of a microscope—a tool very familiar to him because of his father's involvement with it. Lister’s research required considerable sacrifice and dedication, as it was undertaken at night after he had completed a full working-day in the hospital wards. Recognition of Lister’s early research came in 1860, when he was made a Fellow of the Royal Society, the same honour that had been bestoyed upon his father.
In the Edinburgh Hospital where Lister worked, almost half of the surgery patients died from infection. In some hospitals in Europe, as many as 80 per cent died. While surgeons regretted this high death rate, they trained themselves to accept this unpleasant aspect of their work. After all, they thought, nothing could be done about these infections, because they arose spontaneously inside the wound. Lister however, was not convinced of the inevitability of infection (which was also known as sepsis). He began to search for a way of preventing infection—that is, an antisepsis method.

Preventing infection

Lister’s first clue as to the cause of infection came from comparing patients who had simple fractures with those who had compound fractures. Simple fractures do not involve an external wound. These patients had their bones set and placed in a cast, and they recovered. Compound fractures are those where the broken bone pierces the skin and is exposed to the air. More than half of these patients died. Lister reasoned that somehow the infection must enter the wound from the outside. But how exactly did this occur? And what could be done to prevent it?
Lister began washing his hands before operating, and wearing clean clothes. (Others such as Florence Nightingale, the pioneer of modern nursing, had already found that increased cleanliness reduced the death rate from infection among hospital patients. However, these ideas had not yet gained widespread acceptance because the reason behind their success was not understood.) Even though Lister’s procedures were scoffed at by some of his colleagues, who considered it a status symbol to be covered in blood from previous operations, his talent was becoming recognized. In 1860 he became Professor of Surgery at Glasgow. There, a friend lent him some research papers by the outstanding French chemist, Louis Pasteur. (Like Lister, Pasteur was a committed Christian.)
As the son of a wine merchant, Lister was all too familiar with the problem of wine going bad because of faulty fermentation. Pasteur had shown that the problem was caused by germs which entered from the air, and that organisms did not come to life spontaneously from non-living matter within the wine. Pasteur had demonstrated that life arose from life. His experiments gave no support to the evolutionary idea that the first life arose from non-living matter—a belief still held today by evolutionists. Unlike the evolutionists, whose thinking was held back by their attachment to the idea of spontaneous generation, Lister immediately recognized the truth and usefulness of Pasteur’s work. If infection arose spontaneously within a wound, it would be virtually impossible to eliminate it. However, if germs entering from the air outside the wound caused infection (in the same way that the wine became contaminated), then those germs could be killed and infection prevented.
Pasteur had used heat and filters to eliminate the germs in the wine, but these techniques were not suitable for use with human flesh. Instead, Lister needed to find a suitable chemical to kill the germs. He learned that carbolic acid was being used as an effective disinfectant in sewers and could safely be used on human flesh. Beginning in 1865, Lister used carbolic acid to wash his hands, his instruments, and the bandages used in the operation. Lister also sprayed the air with carbolic acid to kill airborne germs. After more than a year of using and refining these techniques, Lister had sufficient data to show that his methods were a success. He published his findings in the medical journal, The Lancet, in 1867.

Above: An operation in progress in the late 1800s. The man on the right is using a version of Lister’s carbolic spray.

Lister was always eager to acknowledge Louis Pasteur’s invaluable contribution. In a letter to Pasteur in February 1874, Lister gave him ‘thanks for having, by your brilliant researches, proved to me the truth of the germ theory. You furnished me with the principle upon which alone the antiseptic system can be carried out.

Slow acceptance

Two years after publishing his findings, Lister returned to Edinburgh to become Professor of Clinical Surgery—the position formerly held by his eminent father-in-law for more than three decades. Lister introduced his antisepsis procedures in Edinburgh and again met with dramatic success. However, widespread acceptance of Lister’s procedures was rather slow, as is often the case with revolutionary new ideas. Some busy doctors were unwilling to take the time to even consider new ideas. Some found it difficult to believe in germs—living organisms that wrought havoc but were too small to see. Others tried Lister’s procedures, but did so incorrectly and therefore failed to obtain the desired result. (Part of the reason for this was the complexity of Lister’s procedures and the constant modifications he made to his system in order to improve them.) Also, Lister’s method added to the expense involved in dressing wounds.

Lister was neither angered nor discouraged by the controversy that raged about his work. Instead, ‘Lister went on his gentle, unconcerned way saving his patients and trying to cheer them while doing so’.² His compassionate personal involvement with his patients was quite a contrast to the arrogance of those surgeons who believed that such involvement would ‘somehow lessen the holy awe and respect in which patients should hold their doctors’.³

Over the next 12 years, Lister’s methods gradually gained acceptance. Doctors from Denmark and Germany were the first to implement Lister’s antiseptic principle, and they met with stunning success. (For example, in Munich the death rate from infection after surgery dropped from 80 per cent to almost zero.) By 1875, Lister was receiving international acclaim in Europe. However, the majority of English doctors still misunderstood Lister’s work and therefore failed to accept its usefulness. It was not until Lister was appointed Professor of Surgery at King’s College Hospital in London in 1877 that he began to win over the English doctors. By 1879, Lister’s principle of antiseptic surgery had gained almost universal acceptance.

New techniques

Lister went on to develop new surgical techniques by applying his antiseptic principle. He showed that suitably sterilized materials could be left inside the patient. In 1877, he tied broken bones together with sterilized silver wire which was left inside the patient. ‘Anyone trying to wire the broken pieces together without the antiseptic technique would be faced with an infected knee and hospital gangrene. In 1880, he introduced the use of sterilized catgut for internal stitches, as this would subsequently dissolve. (Previously, silk thread used in internal stitching was left hanging out of the wound and was pulled out later, often causing further damage.) Lister also introduced the use of rubber drainage tubes after first using one on Queen Victoria. (For many years he had been surgeon to the Queen.)

In 1883, Queen Victoria honoured Lister by making him Sir Joseph Lister. In 1897, he was given the title Lord Lister of Lyme Regis. He was first to be made a British peer for services to medicine. In 1902, he was given the Order of Merit, and made a Privy Councillor.
In his later years, Lister was given many prestigious positions by the scientific community in recognition of his great contribution to medicine. These included Vice-President of the Royal College of Surgeons, President of the Royal Society, and President of the British Association for the Advancement of Science. In 1891, Lister had helped to establish the British Institute of Preventative Medicine. In 1903, this was renamed the Lister Institute in his honour.

Conclusion

Lister died on February 10, 1912, at Walmer, Kent, England. He had retired in 1893 after a long and outstanding career. Although the materials and procedures used have changed over the years, the antiseptic principle itself remains today as the cornerstone of modern surgery. The importance of Lister’s antiseptic principle is emphasized by eminent creation scientist, Dr. Henry Morris, who says, ‘This development is probably second only to Pasteur’s contribution to the saving of human lives’.⁵

Lister was a committed Christian. He wrote: ‘I am a believer in the fundamental doctrines of Christianity’.⁶ Lister’s character readily showed the outworking of his faith. The World Book Encyclopedia says that ‘Throughout his life, he remained a gentle, shy, unassuming man, firm in his purpose because he humbly believed himself to be directed by God.’

Wayanad Laughing Thrush Rare bird spotted

Rare bird spotted after 23 years


The birds, belonging to the Laughing Thrush family ,are mostly found in north India and only three species of these birds are found in south India.


The Wayanad Laughing Thrush a rare bird was spotted in the forest of Joida taluk after 23 years of its detection. The bird's scientific name is Garrulax delesserti, according to Vijay Mohanaraj Chief Executive Officer of Uttara Kannada Zilla Panchayat.


Famous ornithologist Ranjit Daniels had discovered this bird in the forests of Castile Rock in Joida taluk way back in 1988. Now Prasanna Parab has detected this bird in the Diggi forest. He has submitted the details to Mr. Mohanaraj for the confirmation. The rediscovery of this rare bird has highlighted the importance of the bio-diversity of forests in Joida.

The birds belonging to the Laughing Thrush family are mostly found in north India and only three species of these birds are found in south India. Parab has spotted rare birds such as Malayan Night Heron and Nilgiri Wood Pigeon in Joida forests. The forest falls under the Dandeli - Anashi Project Tiger area and adjacent to the Molem Wild sanctuary in Goa. Malbar Tregon, Grey headed Bulbul, Ruby Throated bulbul are also identified in these areas, according to Vijay Mohanraj.

Louis Pasteur.

WHO WAS LOUIS PASTEUR?
Louis Pasteur was a world renowned French chemist and biologist. He was born on December 27 1822 in the town of Dole in Eastern France. Pasteur's parents were peasants, his father was a tanner by trade. He spent the early days of his life in the small town of Arbois where he attended school and where it seems that Pasteur did not do very well, preferring instead to go fishing. His headmaster, however, spotted potential in Pasteur and encouraged him to go to Paris to study. So, aged fifteen Pasteur set off for Paris hoping to study for his entrance exams. Unfortunately, the young Pasteur was so homesick that his father had to travel to Paris to bring him home. He then continued to study locally at Besancon, until he decided to try again in Paris. This time he succeeded and went on to study at the Ecole Normale Superieure. Curiously, although the young Pasteur worked hard during his student days he was not considered to be exceptional in any way at chemistry.
In 1847 Pasteur was awarded his doctorate and then took up a post as assistant to one of his teachers. He spent several years teaching and carrying out research at Dijon and Strasbourg and in 1854 moved to the University of Lille where he became professor of chemistry. Here he continued the work on fermentation he had already started at Strasbourg. By 1857 Pasteur had become world famous and took up a post at the Ecole Normale Superieure in Paris. In 1863 he became dean of the new science faculty at Lille University. While there, he started evening classes for workers. In 1867 a laboratory was established for his discovery of the rabies vaccine, using public funds. It became known as the Pasteur Institute and was headed by Pasteur until his death in 1895.

---

SO WHAT DID PASTEUR ACTUALLY DO?

Pasteur founded the science of microbiology and proved that most infectious diseases are caused by micro-organisms. This became known as the "germ theory" of disease. He was the inventor of the process of pasteurisation and also developed vaccines for several diseases including rabies. The discovery of the vaccine for rabies led to the founding of the Pasteur Institute in Paris in 1888.

---

SO HOW DID PASTEUR MAKE HIS DISCOVERIES?
When he was only twenty-six years old Pasteur solved a problem that had been puzzling the great chemists of the day. He found that when light was passed through tartaric acid - this was found in wine dregs, it produced a strange effect. Pasteur proved that this was because the acid is actually not one acid but a mixture of different acids. This find impressed the scientists of influence and established Pasteur's reputation.
While at the University of Strasbourg he became interested in fermentation and this interest continued when he moved to the University of Lille. The faculty had been established partly to serve as a means of applying science to the problems of the industries of the region, especially the production of alcoholic drinks. This work in fermentation enabled Pasteur to identify that the changes brought about when beer or wine ferments, milk turns sour or meat decays, occur when special micro-organisms are present.
As a result of these findings Pasteur was asked to help the local breweries where the beer had turned bad. The souring of wine and beer was a major economic problem in France. Pasteur looked at some droplets of bad beer through a microscope and observed that the beer contained small rod shaped bacteria, instead of round yeast cells. Although micro-organisms are essential in fermentation they must be the right ones. This was a major discovery. Pasteur made brewing a more scientific procedure and showed brewers how to culture the right organisms for good beer. He also demonstrated to the wine industry that if wine is gently heated to sixty degrees celsius for a short time, the growth of harmful bacteria is prevented and the wine does not go sour in bottles or barrels.
Pasteur then extended this to other problems such as the souring of milk. He proposed heating the milk to a high temperature and pressure before bottling. The process is now in widespread use and is called pasteurisation.

---

WHAT OTHER DISCOVERIES DID PASTEUR MAKE?
By 1857 Pasteur had become world famous and took up an appointment as director of scientific studies at the Ecole Normale in Paris. He was asked to help to investigate a serious disease that was ruining the silk industry in southern France. The disease known as pebrine attacked the silk worms. The signs of the disease were that the eggs did not hatch or the worms would die before making their silk cocoons. It had now reached epidemic proportions and even disease free worms brought in from Spain and Italy had been contaminated. By 1864 there were no uncontaminated eggs left, except for those brought in from Japan.
Pasteur observed through his microscope that the diseased caterpillars and eggs all contained tiny organisms. He identified these as disease producing organisms. He managed to obtain some healthy worms and he divided them into two lots. He fed one lot with mulberry leaves smeared with the remains of diseased worms and fed the others with mulberry leaves smeared with the remains of healthy worms. Pasteur was able to show that the worms fed on diseased smeared leaves got the disease, whereas those fed on uncontaminated leaves remained disease free. He then worked with the silk industry to devise a simple way of keeping silk worms under healthy conditions and therefore disease free.
Not only had Pasteur rescued the French silk industry but he had established the connection between bacteria and disease. The connection had not been fully understood before.
This was a major discovery.
Pasteur's work on the link between bacteria and disease came to the attention of the famous Edinburgh surgeon Lord Lister. Lord Lister was concerned with the number of people who died after having operations in hospital. To combat infection, Lister introduced disinfectant sprays during operations, these prevented bacteria from entering a wound. He also introduced the use of dressings soaked in carbolic acid and strict hygiene rules to combat sepsis. The sterile methods introduced by Lister, drastically reduced the number of hospital deaths.
In France at that time many cattle suffered from anthrax, a serious disease from which many of them died. Pasteur made a careful study of anthrax and noticed that some cows developed the disease more severely than others. So he decided to inject two cows with a strong dose of the anthrax bacteria, fully expecting them to die. To Pasteur's amazement neither of them developed the disease. Later, he found that both animals had already suffered from anthrax. Could they be immune to it? Could they be protected in some other way? Pasteur believed that if it were possible to give an animal a mild attack, this might be sufficient to prevent it from getting the disease later on.
Eventually, after many experiments Pasteur succeeded in producing a weakened and harmless culture of anthrax bacteria. He inoculated cattle and sheep with this giving them a mild form from which they recovered. When these animals were put with others who had a severe form they remained unaffected. They were immune.
Pasteur worked throughout the rest of his life on the various causes of diseases and how these could be prevented by vaccination.

---

PASTEUR AND RABIES
Pasteur is particularly renowned for his work on the vaccine for rabies, a highly contagious infection which attacks the central nervous system. It enters the body through the bite of an infected animal or through infected saliva entering an existing wound. After experimenting with the saliva of animals suffering from the disease, Pasteur concluded that the disease rests in the central nervous system of the body. When an extract from the spinal column of an rabid dog was injected into healthy animals symptoms of rabies were produced. By studying the tissues of infected animals- rabbits, Pasteur was able to produce an attenuated form of the virus. This could be used for inoculation.
On July 6 1885, Pasteur tested his pioneering rabies vaccine on man for the first time. He saved the life of a young man called Joseph Meister who had been bitten by a rabid dog. Pasteur was urged to treat him with his new method. The treatment lasted 10 days and at the end he recovered and remained healthy. Since then thousands have been saved by this treatment.
On March 1886, Pasteur was invited to present his results to the Academy of Sciences and in 1888 went on to found the Pasteur Institute in Paris. This was a pioneering clinic for the study of infectious diseases, the treatment of rabies and a centre for teaching. Pasteur directed the Institute personally until he died. The Pasteur Institute is still one of the most important centres in the world.
Pasteur became a national hero and was honoured in many ways. He died at Saint-Cloud on 28 September 1895 and was given a state funeral at the Cathedral of Notre Dame and his body placed in a permanent crypt at the Pasteur Institute.
Modifications of the Pasteur method are still used in rabies therapy today. The traditional vaccine contains inactivated rabies virus grown in duck eggs. A newer vaccine which contains virus prepared from human cells grown in the laboratory is safer and requires a shorter course of injections.
 

Ignaz Semmelweis ..Unsung hero of Antisepsis

Ignaz Semmelweis

According to Wikipedia*, "Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis (July 1, 1818 - August 13, 1865) was the Hungarian physician who demonstrated that puerperal fever (also known as "childbed fever") was contagious and that its incidence could be drastically reduced by enforcing appropriate hand-washing behavior by medical care-givers. He made this discovery in 1847 while working in the Maternity Department of the Vienna Lying-in Hospital. His failure to convince his fellow doctors led to a tragic conclusion, however, he was ultimately vindicated.

Semmelweis realized that the number of cases of puerperal fever was much larger at one of his wards than at the other. After testing a few hypotheses, he found that the number of cases was drastically reduced if the doctors washed their hands carefully before dealing with a pregnant woman. Risk was especially high if they had been in contact with corpses before they treated the women. The germ theory of disease had not yet been developed at the time. Thus, Semelweiss concluded that some unknown "cadaveric material" caused childbed fever.

He lectured publicly about his results in 1850, however, the reception by the medical community was cold, if not hostile. His observations went against the current scientific opinion of the time, which blamed diseases on an imbalance of the basical "humours" in the body. It was also argued that even if his findings were correct, washing one's hands each time before treating a pregnant woman, as Semmelweis advised, would be too much work. Nor were doctors eager to admit that they had caused so many deaths. Semmelweis spent 14 years developing his ideas and lobbying for their acceptance, culminating in a book he wrote in 1861. The book received poor reviews, and he responded with polemic. In 1865, he suffered a nervous breakdown and was committed to an insane asylum where he soon died from blood poisoning.

Only after Dr. Semmelweis's death was the germ theory of disease developed, and he is now recognized as a pioneer of antiseptic policy and prevention of nosocomial disease."

Antony Van Leewenhoek... discovery of microbes

Antony Van Leewenhoek

Its hard to imagine doctors and surgeons performing operations without washing their hands or equipment, but at one point in time it was standard practice. Before the discovery of bacteria, thousands died from mysterious illnesses that were often attributed to other causes. In the late 1600's Antony Van Leeuwenhoek had observed microscopic organisms with microscopes he had perfected. His findings and suggestions that these one-celled organisms existed were originally met with skepticism from the Royal Society of London, but were later tested and proven to be true. Today, we owe what we understand about bacteria to Van Leeuwenhoek, his initial work has lead to our modern advances in health care, biology, and how the world works. Bacteria play a vital role in our world from disease prevention and cure to unlocking the origin of life itself, and without our knowledge of these invisible life forms life for us would be very different, if possible at all.

In a letter of September 7, 1674, Leeuwenhoek described observations on lake water, including an excellent description of the green charophyte alga Spirogyra: "Passing just lately over this lake, . . . and examining this water next day, I found floating therein divers earthy particles, and some green streaks, spirally wound serpent-wise, and orderly arranged, after the manner of the copper or tin worms, which distillers use to cool their liquors as they distil over. The whole circumference of each of these streaks was about the thickness of a hair of one's head. . . all consisted of very small green globules joined together: and there were very many small green globules as well."

On September 17, 1683, Leeuwenhoek wrote to the Royal Society about his observations on the plaque between his own teeth, "a little white matter, which is as thick as if 'twere batter." He repeated these observations on two ladies (probably his own wife and daughter), and on two old men who had never cleaned their teeth in their lives. Looking at these samples with his microscope, Leeuwenhoek reported how in his own mouth: "I then most always saw, with great wonder, that in the said matter there were many very little living animalcules, very prettily a-moving. The biggest sort. . . had a very strong and swift motion, and shot through the water (or spittle) like a pike does through the water. The second sort. . . oft-times spun round like a top. . . and these were far more in number." In the mouth of one of the old men, Leeuwenhoek found "an unbelievably great company of living animalcules, a-swimming more nimbly than any I had ever seen up to this time. The biggest sort. . . bent their body into curves in going forwards. . . Moreover, the other animalcules were in such enormous numbers, that all the water. . . seemed to be alive." These were among the first observations on living bacteria ever recorded. 

Blood Banks.

Dr. Charles Richard Drew (June 3, 1904 - April 1, 1950) was an American medical doctor and surgeon who started the idea of a blood bank and a system for the long-term preservation of blood plasma (he found that plasma kept longer than whole blood). His ideas revolutionized the medical profession and have saved many, many lives.
Dr. Drew set up and operated the blood plasma bank at the Presbyterian Hospital in New York City, NY. Drew's project was the model for the Red Cross' system of blood banks, of which he became the first director. Drew resigned his position as director after the US War Department issued a directive stating that blood taken from white donors should not be mixed with blood taken from black donors. Dr. Drew strongly objected, and stated "the blood of individual human beings may differ by blood groupings, but there is absolutely no scientific basis to indicate any difference in human blood from race to race." Dr. Drew also formed Britain's blood bank system.
Dr. Drew died on April 1, 1950, after a car accident in in rural North Carolina. Although there is a legend that he died as a result of being denied a blood transfusion and medical care from a "whites-only" hospital, Dr. Drew got immediate medical attention, in part from the other doctors (his friends) who were in the car accident with him (but were less severely injured). Dr. Drew was admitted to a mixed-race hospital, but died after being treated for massive internal injuries. A U.S. postage stamp was issued in 1981 to honor Dr. Drew.
Stamp in honour of Dr.DrewDr.Chales Richard Drew

CAN OPENERS

Can Opener, 1858

British merchant Peter Durand made a huge stride in food preservation with his 1810 invention of the can. Canned rations provided to soldiers and explorers saved legions from sure starvation. So grateful for its inner contents were the hungry recipients that no one really complained about the sweat and toil often required to simply open the can.

In 1858 Ezra J. Warner of Waterbury, Connecticut, patented the first can opener. An intimidating combination of bayonet and sickle, Warner's invention was nonetheless eagerly adopted by the U.S. military during the Civil War. Household use of the can opener increased when William W. Lyman's more user-friendly model was introduced in 1870. No longer did opening a can of peaches mean risking one's fingers. 

MODERN CAN OPENER.

Lever type Can Opener

Electric Can Opener
Swiss Knie with can opener