Emanuel Klein. 1844–1925

Bulloch, William

doi:10.1002/path.1700280423

Cited by 9 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This could be explained by their background. While on one hand Koch was a practising physician before he became laboratory bacteriologist,3 on the other hand Klein studied under experimental physiologist Ernst von Brücke and experimental pathologist Salomon Stricker, and had never practiced medicine 12. According to Watkin, although Klein appreciated Koch's work he placed emphasis on the conditions under which bacteria developed, seeing that cholera only proliferated when certain conditions combined.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

1885 Cholera Controversy: Klein versus Koch: Figure 1

Atalić

2010

Med Humanities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper will try to give new insight into the Cholera Controversy, which occurred 125 years ago. The majority of papers already written on the topic have emphasised the role of Robert Koch who described the comma bacillus as the cause of cholera epidemics. At the same time they have marginalised the role of Emanuel Edward Klein by stating that he was wrong when he objected to Robert Koch's statement, because as an employee of the British government he was politically motivated. Moreover, they have paid barely any attention to Klein's writings on the subject. In this paper I will try to approach his attitudes from the scientific, not political, perspective and try to explain the reasons why he challenged Koch.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

1885 Cholera Controversy: Klein versus Koch: Figure 1

Atalić

2010

Med Humanities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In 1886 erschien dann noch die Übersetzung aus seiner Feder von Emanuel Edward Kleins (1844–1925; [ 29 ]) „Grundzüge der Histologie“ (Elements of Histology; [ 30 ]).…”

Section: Wissenschaftliches Oeuvreunclassified

Carl Arthur Kollmann: Urologe, Venerologe und Puppenspieler in Leipzig

Moll

2023

Urologie

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ZusammenfassungWährend die Erinnerungskultur zu dem aus Dresden stammenden sächsischen Urologen Felix Martin Oberländer innerhalb der deutschen Urologie gut entwickelt ist und sein Name in einem seit 1997 gestifteten Preis der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Urologie e. V. weiter fortlebt, ist die Erinnerung und das Wissen um Felix-Arthur Kollmann aus Leipzig in der Urologie verlorengegangen. Die Erinnerung an ihn in seinem weiteren akademischen Betätigungsfeld, dem Puppenspiel und der Puppenspielforschung ist bis heute lebendig.

show abstract

“…It seemed that Klein, as a foreigner, did not know how to respond appropriately before the Commission, as may be inferred from the following excerpt: Although Klein sent a revised version of his statement, when he finally realized the mistake he had made in speaking so candidly, it was already too late. The Commission decided to publish both of his statements, and the image of a cruel vivisectionist was created in the eyes of the general public, despite his friends' claims that he was actually fond of animals, especially dogs (Bulloch 1925). Consequently, the image of Klein as a prototype of a monstrous vivisectionist remained unchanged until his death in 1925.…”

Section: The Royal Commission On Vivisection For Scientific Purposesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Emanuel Edward Klein—The Father of British Microbiology and the Case of the Animal Vivisection Controversy of 1875

Atalić

Fatović‐Ferenčić

2009

Toxicol Pathol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The new Appendix A of the European Convention for the Protection of Vertebrate Animals Used for Experimental and Other Scientific Purposes, which gives guidelines for accommodation and care of animals and was approved on June 15, 2006, was the main reason the authors decided to investigate the origins of the regulations of animal experiments. Although one might assume that the regulation had its origin in the United Nations conventions, the truth is that its origins are a hundred years old. The authors present a case of the nineteenth-century vivisection controversy brought about by the publication of the Handbook for the Physiological Laboratory in 1873, in which John Burdon-Sanderson, Emanuel Edward Klein, Michael Foster, and Thomas Lauder Brunton described a series of vivisection experiments they performed on animals for research purposes. It was the first case of vivisection to be examined, processed, and condemned for inhuman behavior toward animals before an official body, leading to enactment of the Cruelty to Animals Act in 1876. The case reveals a specific ethos of science in the second half of the nineteenth century, which was characterized by a deep commitment of scientists to the scientific enterprise and their strong belief that science could solve social problems, combined with an overt insensitivity to the suffering of experimental animals. The central figure in the case was Emanuel Edward Klein, a disciple of the Central European medical tradition (Vienna Medical School) and a direct follower of the experimental school of Brücke, Stricker, Magendie, and Bernard. Because of his undisguised attitudes and opinions on the use of vivisection, Klein became a paradigm of the new scientific identity, strongly influencing the stereotypic image of a scientist, and polarizing the public opinion on vivisection in England in the nineteenth century and for some considerable time afterward.

show abstract

Emanuel Klein. 1844–1925

Cited by 9 publications

References 0 publications

1885 Cholera Controversy: Klein versus Koch: Figure 1

1885 Cholera Controversy: Klein versus Koch: Figure 1

Carl Arthur Kollmann: Urologe, Venerologe und Puppenspieler in Leipzig

Emanuel Edward Klein—The Father of British Microbiology and the Case of the Animal Vivisection Controversy of 1875

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About