Historical Significance in the Field of Epidemiology and Patterns of Disease.
Key individuals and historical events have helped shape the field of epidemiology. Research the following individuals and their roles in shaping contemporary epidemiology:
Choose three of the individuals from your research. In a 1,000-1,250 word paper, describe the epidemiological advancements that were influenced by these individuals. Include the following:Historical Significance in the Field of Epidemiology and Patterns of Disease.
Describe the disease and the event. Using descriptive epidemiology, discuss how common the disease was at the time, who was infected, when it occurred (time of year or season), and the mode of transmission. If the individual is not associated with a specific disease, discuss a significant disease happening during that period.
Discuss how the individuals influenced or advanced epidemiological methods and the process they used to describe and control disease. Discuss how their contributions helped to inform the definition of epidemiology. Consider whether they used qualitative, quantitative, or both types of data collection methods, and the approach they used to test their hypotheses.Historical Significance in the Field of Epidemiology and Patterns of Disease.
Discuss how similar epidemiological methods have been used to understand one current public health issue (not one for each individual). Discuss the key research studies used to understand the risk factors associated with the problem or disease. Two potential examples include lung cancer (Doll and Hill, 1950) or cardiovascular disease and the Framingham Heart Study (Drawber, Meadors, & Moore, 1950; Kannel, 2000).
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for success. Please make sure you use public health and nursing articles
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. Refer to the LopesWrite Technical Support articles for assistance.
John Graunt was conceived and born in London in 1620 and passed away in 1674 at the relatively young age of 53 years. He was an English analyst and for the most part viewed as the originator of the study of demography. Demography is the factual investigation of human populaces. His examination of the essential insights of the London masses impacted the pioneer segment work of different researchers, eminently Sir William and Edmond Halley, (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2020; Encyclopedia of World Biography, 2010; Boslaugh, 2008). James Lind was born in Edinburgh in 1716 and is known for his pioneering epidemiological work on scurvy and its treatment. Edward Jenner was born in 1749 and died in 1823. His groundbreaking epidemiological work was on smallpox and its prevention by vaccination. This paper looks at the epidemiological contribution of each of these three, with regard to the mentioned diseases on which they worked.Historical Significance in the Field of Epidemiology and Patterns of Disease.
John Graunt: 1620-1674 (Plague)
John Graunt published a well known book in 1662 dependent on his pioneering epidemiological perceptions and observations. In this manner, he built up the field of the study of disease transmission. Graunt exposed an assorted variety of realities about human life and illness that had not recently been valued. He was the first to see that the quantity of births and deaths of males surpassed those of females. He saw that in spite of their more noteworthy mortality, men suffered less disease than ladies. Graunt’s observations were correct because he noted the high mortality in youngsters. Specifically, he noted that 33% of them passed away by the age of five. He reported that plague really contributed to a larger number of deaths than had been attributed to it, and he showed that the recurrence of rickets expanded over the range of a couple of years from zero lethal cases to a level that demonstrated a genuine pandemic.Historical Significance in the Field of Epidemiology and Patterns of Disease.
The Pioneering Epidemiological Work of Graunt
Graunt's original work was perceived as an oddity, since it was obviously early days for the discipline. For two centuries after Graunt there was nobody who could be portrayed as a disease transmission expert (Rothman, 2007). Graunt’s work on epidemiology was indeed pioneering since he had to begin without any formal educational preparation. The shark-toothed advancement of plague deaths is evidence of Graunt’s work. For instance in one observation, Graunt registered that after revision for misclassified plague deaths, the plague had decimated quite a gigj number of people - significantly more than every single other reasons for death put together. In any case, this abnormality of plague flare-ups was what Graunt would have anticipated. He knew by experience that plague had inconsistent and unpredictable conduct. What Graunt probably discovered substantially more astonishing is a wonder that couldn't have been observed already. That is the consistency of mortality from causes other than plague (Morabia, 2013).
The Scourge of Plague as a Case Study
Demise on an individual level is indiscriminate and eccentric. Graunt might not have had the option to clarify this, but he was obviously captivated by the anticipated patterns he saw in his population information. He observed that among the few losses of life some bear a consistency while others do not. For instance chronic sicknesses and the infections, whereunto the population is most vulnerable. Graunt's investigations provided him some insight into the beginning of the plague. In Graunt's time, the plague was thought to have been incited by a particular arrangement of planets. This was the popular belief then, as the science of epidemiology was still non-existent. Hence the propensity for certain so-called specialists to fill long calfskin mouths with dry blossoms and odoriferous plants, and spot them right in front of them when they went to torment patients. Graunt's systematic examination highlighted a natural and fluctuating reason for the plague. Plague episodes were not synchronized with prophetic (eg, explicit planet arrangements) or political (eg, crowning celebrations of lords) occasions (Morabia, 2013). As such, it can be comfortably said that Graunt used both quantitative and qualitative types data in his observations.
Graunt’s Contribution to Current Understanding of Epidemiology with Contemporary Health Issues.
Regardless of what one may think, the publication of Grant's work in the 17th century combined population thinking and correlations of population information over time and in a remarkable style. Studies of epidemiological patterns of diseases like ebola fever borrow greatly from the foundational work of Graunt. (Morabia, 2013). Currently, many quantitative research studies following the thinking of Graunt are undertaken to unravel risk factors associated with disease.
James Lind: 1716-1794 (Scurvy)
James Lind was birn in the United Kingdom and attended medical school before joining the Royal Navy. At this period of time, in the 18th century, scurvy was one of the most feared disease conditions. This was especially true for persons who regularly stayed at sea for a considerable period of time. Sailors squarely fell into this category of persons. In his service to the navy and as a physician, James Lind made significant observations on the epidemiological patterns of scurvy including risk factors, incidence, and prevalence.Historical Significance in the Field of Epidemiology and Patterns of Disease. He decided to investigate the disease using scientific methods of experimentation. In this, he used both qualitative and quantitative methods to collect data. Crucially, he investigated the role of oranges in the treatment of scurvy by dividing sailors who were suffering from scurvy into two groups. The groups were given different interventions with one group receiving oranges. This was later heralded as the first clinical trial in medicine. James Lind would later publish his findings and observations on scurvy in a book first published in 1753 (Yanes, 2016). His contribution to epidemiology was therefore immense. To date, randomized controlled trials are the gold standard for establishing efficacy of medical interventions.Historical Significance in the Field of Epidemiology and Patterns of Disease.
Edward Jenner: 1749-1823 (Vaccination for Smallpox)
Edward Jenner on his part is recognized for his pioneering work on smallpox and how it can be prevented. Specifically, he observed the patterns of disease of both smallpox and cowpox and decided to explore the apparent immunological relationship that existed between the two. At the time, smallpox was killing many and there was ni cure for the ailment once contracted. Bit cowpox was also there. Through keen observation and careful experimentation, Jenner was able to use qualitative and quantitative research methods to establish a benefit of cowpox to smallpox. Specifically, he investigated subcutaneous inoculation of persons with the cowpox microbe to see if they gained immunity from smallpox. The results from several of these experiments were astounding. The persons inoculated in this way with cowpox indeed became immune to smallpox. The latter failed to afflict them, even after exposure to the same (Morabia, 2018).Historical Significance in the Field of Epidemiology and Patterns of Disease.
The methods used by Edward Jenner are used to date yo immunise millions of children around the world against polio, tuberculosis, measles, and pertussis amongst other potentially serious disease conditions. Research studies modelled on Jenner’s approach to date seek to be systematic, quantitative, and methodological. The epidemiology of diseases like malaria has been mapped in this very way.
In summary, therefore, the three scientists who are Edward Jenner, James Lind, and John Graunt each made remarkable groundbreaking work in epidemiology on at least one disease. Their early methods, methodological observations and systematic recording of their findings laid the groundwork for epidemiology as we know it today.Historical Significance in the Field of Epidemiology and Patterns of Disease.