Ch.4- Ch.6

These chapters added on to the previous chapters, but there was something that was explained in more detail that really interested me. The way that the USSC contributed to the war is amazing. Though they slowly advanced over time, I do not believe as many people would survive without all there efforts to save lives and improve overall health of people and hospitals. In my opinion, the USSC was definitely the best advancement and organization that was created at the time. There were some negative aspects about it, like some of the leaders were arrogant when it came trying to organize and agree on laws and trying to make sure they were in all the places the war was, but overall, it had an extremely positive outcome. It also helped involve women in the war. Women were not allowed to fight so they probably felt useless to their men, but when the USSC was organized, it allowed women to volunteer as nurses so they could help support their troops. Though men were still in charge of the USSC, I believe the women had the biggest impact when it came to making everything more sanitary and safer and giving the men the support and care they need while they were wounded or ill, and I think the author agree. The main goals of the USSC was to create, promote cleanliness, and make good hospitals and I am excited to see the end product of all the advancements the USSC makes.

Introduction to Chapter 3

The introduction gave a whole overview of the book, but one point that was really stood out was the gender approach. Females are said to be more nurturing so they are the caretakers when a member of their family is ill, and this evolved into women becoming nurses for wounded soldiers. There was also a role reversal when men had to learn the things women usually did like cook and clean and take care of themselves when they went off to war since in the beginning no women were really there. This lead into chapter one where it addresses understanding Civil War medicine. The medicine during this time was practically useless, because it either did not work efficiently or it caused more problems. The method used was the same as women used at home, a comfort tactic, where illness was treated by rest, hydration, good food, and quality care-taking, which really had a positive effect on the outcome of an illness. When women came to take care of the sick men during war, they made the hospitals into a home sickroom, so the men were comforted and felt like they were at home. Also, proper nourishment really outweighed the few drugs they had. One thing that shocked me was the importance of mental strength. It was said that people with a more positive attitude and people that were surround with more happy things, like singing, stories, and letters from home, were more likely to recover from their illness, than people who were glum and had no hope. The second chapter also focused on the position of women in war. Women were still nurses but some sought out to become physicians. There were still way more male doctors and surgeons than females, but I wonder when this will change and there are more than just a few female specialists. Though, nurses aren't as high ranked as doctors, making women technically still less superior to men, at least with the field of nursing, it allowed women to become more involved in the war, get a higher education, and expand their horizons so that they have more opportunities than when they were just stay at home wives and mothers, which I believe is a positive advancement in the slowly developing health care system during the Civil War.
The other big thing that stood out to me in these chapters were the hospitals. There were a few different types of hospitals that were mentioned and they increasingly became more efficient. The first one was the field hospital which was located very close to the battle itself and it was a key element in medical care because its where the wounded and ill were first sent to and it was the quickest place for them to get. Field hospitals were comforting because they had the good care of nurses and friends could visit since the hospitals were close to the regiments, but there were only a few surgeons, sometimes as few as one or two, so people would die waiting on treatment. Since this was said to be the "key element", one would think that there would be more surgeons present, especially since the wounded couldn't be transported to better hospitals. The Surgeon General put Jonathan Letterman in charge, who improved health care systems in the field. One big thing he did was having ambulances which helped with the transport and that is definitely a huge improvement and its very necessary, even today. Another thing he did was send fresh foods to the camps and promote sanitation in the camps. This brought a more feminine aspect to the camps, which brought back the idea of role reversal, and it greatly improved the overall health of the camps. Another hospital talked about were general hospitals, which were in large buildings, usually well outside of the war zone. There were a great deal more surgeons to deal with the great capacity of people in these hospitals. When reading about Churchill's experience in the general hospital, I was surprised. He said the hospital was depressing and terrifying because he could hear the screams of the other wounded people and there were even coffins in the hallways. Also, there was said to be a poor comfort and caring quality, as well as, a lack of sensitivity from the doctors. Since it was determined early on that the comfort factor had a huge impact on positive outcomes, I would have thought that there would be better quality in a hospital with better trained surgeons and more resources than the tents in the field that were used to help people. The other hospital mentioned was the pavilion hospitals in Europe. These hospitals were very sanitary, they had lots of daylight and fresh air. This was really the ideal type of hospital because it had a very therapeutic effect and clearly your surrounding had a huge impact on the outcome of your treatment. This hospital influenced some newer hospitals during this time and it also restated the importance of sanitation and good care-takers.
The third chapter was about infectious diseases, which can be related to the hospitals and the sanitation. Disease was more easily spread in close quarters of small hospitals or because of poor sanitation, which is what doctors thought was the main cause of disease. Doctors were very convinced that if there was good hygiene, then there would be better health and no disease. Good sanitation did have a positive impact on lowering the cause of disease because poor hygiene is a way disease is spread, but it is not the only way. As we know today, there are many other way diseases can form, as told by the theory of disease causation. I wonder if doctors at the time did not throw out the ideas the bacterias and viruses caused disease, if less deaths would have occurred and more advancement would have happened sooner. Eventually, we know these theories did become accepted and medical advancements became greater, which in the end is a very positive outcome for our overall health care system, then and now.

What medicine might have been like before 1920s?

Since there was no antibiotics at this time, medicine was probably not as effective as the medicine today, such as the narrow-spectrum antibiotics that directly go to the source of infection to fix it.