Axis internationalism: Spanish health experts and the Nazi ‘New Europe’, 1939–1945

Many of the forms and practices of interwar internationalism were recreated under the auspices of the Nazi ‘New Europe’. This article will examine these forms of ‘Axis internationalism’ by looking at Spanish health experts' involvement with Nazi Germany during the Second World War. Despite the ambiguous relationship between the Franco regime and the Axis powers, a wide range of Spanish health experts formed close ties with colleagues from Nazi Germany and across Axis and occupied Europe. Many of those involved were relatively conservative figures who also worked with liberal international health organisations in the pre- and post-war eras. Despite their political differences, their opposing attitudes towards eugenics and the tensions caused by German hegemony, Spanish experts were able to rationalise their involvement with Nazi Germany as a mutually-beneficial continuation of pre-war international health cooperation amongst countries united by a shared commitment to modern, ‘totalitarian’ forms of public health. Despite the hostility of Nazi Germany and its European collaborators to both liberal and left-wing forms of internationalism, this phenomenon suggests that the ‘New Europe’ deserves to be studied as part of the wider history of internationalism in general and of international health in particular

The emergence of international food safety standards and guidelines: understanding the current landscape through a historical approach

Following the Second World War, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO) teamed up to construct an International Codex Alimentarius (or 'food code') which emerged in 1963. The Codex Committee on Food Hygiene (CCFH) was charged with the task of developing microbial hygiene standards, although it found itself embroiled in debate with the WHO over the nature these standards should take. The WHO was increasingly relying upon the input of biometricians and especially the International Commission on Microbial Specifications for Foods (ICMSF) which had developed statistical sampling plans for determining the microbial counts in the final end products. The CCFH, however, was initially more focused on a qualitative approach which looked at the entire food production system and developed codes of practice as well as more descriptive end-product specifications which the WHO argued were 'not scientifically correct'. Drawing upon historical archival material (correspondence and reports) from the WHO and FAO, this article examines this debate over microbial hygiene standards and suggests that there are many lessons from history which could shed light upon current debates and efforts in international food safety management systems and approaches

Polymorphous adenocarcinoma of the salivary glands : reappraisal and update

Although relatively rare, polymorphous adenocarcinoma (PAC) is likely the second most common malignancy of the minor salivary glands (MiSG). The diagnosis is mainly based on an incisional biopsy. The optimal treatment comprises wide surgical excision, often with adjuvant radiotherapy. In general, PAC has a good prognosis. Previously, PAC was referred to as polymorphous low-grade adenocarcinoma (PLGA), but the new WHO classification of salivary gland tumours has also included under the PAC subheading, the so-called cribriform adenocarcinoma of minor salivary glands (CAMSG). This approach raised controversy, predominantly because of possible differences in clinical behaviour. For example, PLGA (PAC, classical variant) only rarely metastasizes, whereas CAMSG often shows metastases to the neck lymph nodes. Given the controversy, this review reappraises the definition, epidemiology, clinical presentation, diagnostic work-up, genetics, treatment modalities, and prognosis of PAC of the salivary glands with a particular focus on contrasting differences with CAMSG.Peer reviewe

Attitudes Toward Mental Health Professionals In A Hospital-Based Community Mental-Health-Center

This study examined the attitudes of several diverse subject groups in a large medical center toward various mental health professionals. The groups consisted of: general hospital staff; professional mental health workers; and psychiatric in-patients. Subjects evaluated a selection of 11 professional health related role titles (clinical psychologist, physician, psychiatrist, etc.) and the categories me and mental patient by marking a series of 19 seven-step rating scales, each composed of bipolar anchoring adjectives. Additionally, a familiarity rating for each of the role titles was obtained. An understanding and a value cluster were derived from the 19 adjectives along with an overall favorability-unfavorability score for each role title. It was expected that subjects would value mental health professional roles more strongly than they would indicate an understanding of these same roles. Secondly, it was expected that the hospital setting itself, the subject\u27s role within that setting, and the degree of familiarity with the role being rated would have a significant impact on the subject\u27s attitude. Results generally supported the above expectations. Overall ratings of the professional groups were consistently high, with less difference between the health designations (physician, nurse) and the psych designations than has been previously reported in the literature