- Email: [email protected]
1132 JOHN HUNTER (1728-1793), THE EXPERIMENTAL SURGEON, AND THE BIRTH OF SCIENTIFIC UROLOGY
e438
THE JOURNAL OF UROLOGY姞
Vol. 183, No. 4, Supplement, Monday, May 31, 2010
properly played, and one wag commented that the affected cellists might be supplementing their meager incomes by sweeping chimneys! In any case, by Christmas 2008, the Murphys decided it was time to “come clean,” and sent the BMJ a letter of retraction which was published in January 2009, admitting that cello scrotum was indeed a high-brow hoax. The BMJ took the matter in stride, commenting that no one was harmed by the light-hearted deception, especially the Murphys (she sits on the board overseeing the British National Health Service and is a member of the House of Lords, and he is chairman of a brewery), and that the BMJ will continue its pioneering efforts on behalf of musicians’ health. METHODS: N/A RESULTS: N/A CONCLUSIONS: N/A Source of Funding: None
1132 JOHN HUNTER (1728-1793), THE EXPERIMENTAL SURGEON, AND THE BIRTH OF SCIENTIFIC UROLOGY Benjamin Challacombe*, Sarah Wheatstone, Prokar Dasgupta, Stephen Challacombe, London, United Kingdom INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: John Hunter is considered to be the father of comparative anatomy and experimental (scientific) surgery. Hunter allowed the advancement of surgery as a scientific discipline by testing his theories as they arose and his contribution to urological surgery, in particular, is immense. METHODS: John Hunter came to London from Scotland in 1748 and joined his brother William in teaching anatomy. He became assistant to William Cheselden at the Royal Hospital Chelsea from 1749-1750 and was appointed apprentice to Sir Percival Pott at St. Bartholomew’s Hospital in 1751. Following this he began 4 years of anatomical dissections of humans and countless species of animals, many thousands of which are preserved in the Hunterian museum (14,000 in total & 500 species. He was the first to describe the importance of androgens in prostatic development and proved this by the dissection of castrated male animals. His work also first described bladder outflow obstruction from occlusive prostates and in 1788 Hunter noted lateral and middle lobe BPH stating “ the sides of the canal are compressed together causing obstruction to the passage of urine”. In addition he described the gubernaculum, testicular descent, and the potential for artificial insemination. RESULTS: Hunter described many other common urological pathologies including the hydrocele, renal calculi, urogenital fistulas, gonococcal urethritis, infective cystitis, and syphilis. He proposed the infective theory for the aetiology of most urethral strictures, recommended urethral dilatations and successfully performed external urethrotomy. As a pupil of Cheselden, Hunter was also a swift and skillful perineal lithotomist CONCLUSIONS: Hunter believed surgery should be governed by scientific principles, which were based on reasoning, observation, and experimentation. He lived by his motto “I think the solution is just, but why think? Why not try the experiment?” His straightforward technique of experimental trials of his theories reaped huge rewards in the advancement of urological surgery. He looked at what was in front of him, tested it and interpreted it in the context of current surgical knowledge. As an anatomist, scientist, and dedicated expermentor he can be regarded as the father of scientfic surgery making huge contributions to urology in particular.
Source of Funding: None
1133 ‘PECUNIA NON OLET!’ MONEY THAT DOES NOT SMELL AND THE BIRTH OF PUBLIC LAVATORIES Rajesh Nair*, London, United Kingdom; Seshadri Sriprasad, Dartford, United Kingdom INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The Roman Empire regarded urine a valuable commodity. It was collected from public latrines, and imported from neighboring colonies where it was used as a raw material in tanning, laundering and as tooth-paste. We examine the role of urine in first century Rome and explore ’vectigal urinae’, a special tax levied by Roman Emperors Nero and Vespasian for its trade. METHODS: Time related sources in historical literature were reviewed, including archives and manuscripts at the Wellcome History of Medicine Collection, Museum of London and the British Museum, London. RESULTS: First century Rome saw the introduction of vectigal urinae, a tax introduced by Roman emperor Nero and Vespasian for the collection and distribution of urine. The wealthy buyers of urine paid the tax for this valuable liquid. Lower classes of the empire would collect their urine and empty it into cesspools. Added to this was the effluent from public lavatories. The tax applied to all public toilets within Rome’s now famous Cloaca Maxima (great sewer) system and funded their further development. The urine itself was an expensive raw commodity. It was used in the tanning industry, where it was mixed with the hide to soften it, loosen the hairs and dissolve the fat from its surface. It was also used as bleach where tunics were immersed in urine and whitened. The smell of urine was then washed out with water. Wealthy Romans, especially women were willing to pay large sums of money for toothpaste in which urine was the key ingredient. It was thought that one’s own urine or that of another Roman would not be effective but rather Portuguese urine provided an ideal whitening effect. Thus, large quantities of the ‘stronger’ Portuguese urine were imported for this purpose. It is said that when Vespasian’s son Titus protested against
THE JOURNAL OF UROLOGY姞
Vol. 183, No. 4, Supplement, Monday, May 31, 2010
properly played, and one wag commented that the affected cellists might be supplementing their meager incomes by sweeping chimneys! In any case, by Christmas 2008, the Murphys decided it was time to “come clean,” and sent the BMJ a letter of retraction which was published in January 2009, admitting that cello scrotum was indeed a high-brow hoax. The BMJ took the matter in stride, commenting that no one was harmed by the light-hearted deception, especially the Murphys (she sits on the board overseeing the British National Health Service and is a member of the House of Lords, and he is chairman of a brewery), and that the BMJ will continue its pioneering efforts on behalf of musicians’ health. METHODS: N/A RESULTS: N/A CONCLUSIONS: N/A Source of Funding: None
1132 JOHN HUNTER (1728-1793), THE EXPERIMENTAL SURGEON, AND THE BIRTH OF SCIENTIFIC UROLOGY Benjamin Challacombe*, Sarah Wheatstone, Prokar Dasgupta, Stephen Challacombe, London, United Kingdom INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: John Hunter is considered to be the father of comparative anatomy and experimental (scientific) surgery. Hunter allowed the advancement of surgery as a scientific discipline by testing his theories as they arose and his contribution to urological surgery, in particular, is immense. METHODS: John Hunter came to London from Scotland in 1748 and joined his brother William in teaching anatomy. He became assistant to William Cheselden at the Royal Hospital Chelsea from 1749-1750 and was appointed apprentice to Sir Percival Pott at St. Bartholomew’s Hospital in 1751. Following this he began 4 years of anatomical dissections of humans and countless species of animals, many thousands of which are preserved in the Hunterian museum (14,000 in total & 500 species. He was the first to describe the importance of androgens in prostatic development and proved this by the dissection of castrated male animals. His work also first described bladder outflow obstruction from occlusive prostates and in 1788 Hunter noted lateral and middle lobe BPH stating “ the sides of the canal are compressed together causing obstruction to the passage of urine”. In addition he described the gubernaculum, testicular descent, and the potential for artificial insemination. RESULTS: Hunter described many other common urological pathologies including the hydrocele, renal calculi, urogenital fistulas, gonococcal urethritis, infective cystitis, and syphilis. He proposed the infective theory for the aetiology of most urethral strictures, recommended urethral dilatations and successfully performed external urethrotomy. As a pupil of Cheselden, Hunter was also a swift and skillful perineal lithotomist CONCLUSIONS: Hunter believed surgery should be governed by scientific principles, which were based on reasoning, observation, and experimentation. He lived by his motto “I think the solution is just, but why think? Why not try the experiment?” His straightforward technique of experimental trials of his theories reaped huge rewards in the advancement of urological surgery. He looked at what was in front of him, tested it and interpreted it in the context of current surgical knowledge. As an anatomist, scientist, and dedicated expermentor he can be regarded as the father of scientfic surgery making huge contributions to urology in particular.
Source of Funding: None
1133 ‘PECUNIA NON OLET!’ MONEY THAT DOES NOT SMELL AND THE BIRTH OF PUBLIC LAVATORIES Rajesh Nair*, London, United Kingdom; Seshadri Sriprasad, Dartford, United Kingdom INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The Roman Empire regarded urine a valuable commodity. It was collected from public latrines, and imported from neighboring colonies where it was used as a raw material in tanning, laundering and as tooth-paste. We examine the role of urine in first century Rome and explore ’vectigal urinae’, a special tax levied by Roman Emperors Nero and Vespasian for its trade. METHODS: Time related sources in historical literature were reviewed, including archives and manuscripts at the Wellcome History of Medicine Collection, Museum of London and the British Museum, London. RESULTS: First century Rome saw the introduction of vectigal urinae, a tax introduced by Roman emperor Nero and Vespasian for the collection and distribution of urine. The wealthy buyers of urine paid the tax for this valuable liquid. Lower classes of the empire would collect their urine and empty it into cesspools. Added to this was the effluent from public lavatories. The tax applied to all public toilets within Rome’s now famous Cloaca Maxima (great sewer) system and funded their further development. The urine itself was an expensive raw commodity. It was used in the tanning industry, where it was mixed with the hide to soften it, loosen the hairs and dissolve the fat from its surface. It was also used as bleach where tunics were immersed in urine and whitened. The smell of urine was then washed out with water. Wealthy Romans, especially women were willing to pay large sums of money for toothpaste in which urine was the key ingredient. It was thought that one’s own urine or that of another Roman would not be effective but rather Portuguese urine provided an ideal whitening effect. Thus, large quantities of the ‘stronger’ Portuguese urine were imported for this purpose. It is said that when Vespasian’s son Titus protested against