Matthis Krischel

Forschungsperspektiven zur Geschichte der Urologie in Deutschland, 1933–1945

ZusammenfassungWährend der nationalsozialistischen Diktatur zwischen 1933 und 1945 passte sich die deutsche Ärzteschaft schnell und weitgehend widerstandslos an die neuen Machtverhältnisse an. Obwohl der Anteil jüdischer und jüdischstämmiger Mediziner in der 1907 gegründeten Deutschen Gesellschaft für Urologie (DGfU) überdurchschnittlich hoch war, ließ sich die Gesellschaft schnell gleichschalten und im Sinne der nationalsozialistischen Gesundheitspolitik vereinnahmen. Bereits 1933 wurde die Gesellschaft Reichsdeutscher Urologen (GRU) gegründet und jüdische Ärzte wurden aus den Herausgebergremien der Fachzeitschriften gedrängt und jüdische Hochschullehrer entlassen. Gleichzeitig schritt die Fachentwicklung der Urologie im Dritten Reich weiter voran.AbstractBetween 1933 and 1945, German medical practitioners were easily persuaded to align themselves with Nazi ideology. Jewish urologists were forced out of academia, editorial boards of medical journals and medical practice. Like most German physicians, urologists quickly accepted their new role as caretakers of public health instead of individual patients’ wellbeing. The specialty of urology profited from this collaboration with Nazi policies as it gained further independence.

Die Deutsche Gesellschaft für Urologie in der unmittelbaren Nachkriegszeit

ZusammenfassungIn diesem Beitrag wird der Umgang der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Urologie (DGU) mit ihrer eigenen Geschichte in den Jahren von 1945–1961 thematisiert. Dabei werden die Wiederbegründung der DGU 1949, personelle und institutionelle Kontinuitäten und Brüche, der Umgang mit der eigenen Geschichte im Nationalsozialismus, insbesondere mit den vertriebenen Kollegen, sowie die trotz zweier deutscher Staaten enge Verflechtung der deutsch-deutschen Urologie behandelt.AbstractThis article outlines the handling by the German Society of Urology (DGU) of its own history between 1945 and 1961. Topics include the re-formation of the society in 1949, the official disbandment of the pre-war society in 1955, the handling of the history of the Nazi era professional society and the close connections between East and West German urologists. Finally, the establishment of an institutional interpretation of history will be examined.This article outlines the handling by the German Society of Urology (DGU) of its own history between 1945 and 1961. Topics include the re-formation of the society in 1949, the official disbandment of the pre-war society in 1955, the handling of the history of the Nazi era professional society and the close connections between East and West German urologists. Finally, the establishment of an institutional interpretation of history will be examined.

Die 1907 gegründete „Deutsche Gesellschaft für Urologie“ und die „Gesellschaft Reichsdeutscher Urologen“ im Nationalsozialismus

ZusammenfassungDie 1907 gegründete Deutsche Gesellschaft für Urologie war eigentlich eine deutsch-österreichische Gesellschaft, in der jüdische und jüdischstämmige Ärzte wichtige Rollen eingenommen hatten. Zum Zeitpunkt der nationalsozialistischen Machtergreifung 1933 war mit Hans Rubritius ein Österreicher Vorsitzender der Gesellschaft. Der nicht „reichsdeutsche“ Vorsitz und die Ausgrenzung der jüdischen Kollegen aus der Fachgesellschaft und ärztlichen Praxis führten zu einer Lähmung der Gesellschaft für Urologie, die bis Rubritius‘ Tod 1943 anhielt. Gleichzeitig wurde Mitte der 1930er Jahre in Deutschland die Gesellschaft Reichsdeutscher Urologen gegründet, deren Mitglieder sich an nationalsozialistischer Gesundheitspolitik orientieren und im Gegenzug fachpolitische und persönliche Vorteile erhielten.AbstractThe Deutsche Gesellschaft für Urologie (German Urological Association), established in 1907, was a German-Austrian medical society in which Jewish physicians held important positions. When the Nazis seized power in 1933, the Austrian Hans Rubritius was president of the society. The non-German presidency and the exclusion of Jewish colleagues from the professional society and medical practice led to a halt of the society’s activities. At the same time in the mid 1930s, German urologists founded the Gesellschaft Reichsdeutscher Urologen (Association of Reichs-German Urologists) whose members aligned themselves with Nazi health policies and in turn received professional and personal benefits.

Urologie und Nationalsozialismus

ZusammenfassungAlexander von Lichtenberg (1880–1949) gehört unbestritten zu den Nestoren der deutschsprachigen Urologie vor dem Zweiten Weltkrieg. Neben der Ausscheidungsurographie gab er ein spezielles Prostataresektionsinstrument an. 1928 war er Präsident des 8. Deutschen Urologenkongresses in Berlin, sein 5-bändiges Handbuch der Urologie, bei Ferdinand Springer zwischen 1926–1929 erschienen, war lange Zeit tonangebend bei urologischen Handbüchern und war äußeres Zeichen der Fachetablierung der Spezialdisziplin. Darüber hinaus stiftete er die höchste wissenschaftliche Auszeichnung der DGU, den Maximilian-Nitze-Preis. Als Jude wurde ihm die Lehrbefugnis nach 1933 entzogen und er wurde in Folge der nationalsozialistischen Rassengesetze gezwungen, Deutschland zu verlassen. Auch in Ungarn, seiner Heimat, war er antisemitischen Anfeindungen ausgesetzt. Später lebte er bis zu seinem Tode in Mexiko. Die Arbeit würdigt den großen Wissenschaftler vor dem Hintergrund des Holocaust und dem Exodus jüdischer deutscher Geistesschaffender.AbstractAlexander von Lichtenberg (1880–1949) was one of the famous members of the German Urological Society (DGU) in pre-war Germany. He introduced excretion urography and a special TURP Instrument. In 1928 he was president of the 8th meeting held in the German capital Berlin. His Handbook of Urology, released by Ferdinand Springer publishing house, was a trendsetter in establishing urology as a specialty in Germany and bringing together the whole wisdom of all aspects of urology. He was the founder of the famous Maximilian Nitze Award of the DGU. As a Jew he—like many others—was forced to leave Nazi Germany after 1933. Even in Hungary, his native country, he again had to resist anti-Semitic hostility. Later on he lived in Mexico. Alexander von Lichtenberg has to be remembered with special focus on the exodus of German Jewish scientists during the Nazi time.Alexander von Lichtenberg (1880-1949) was one of the famous members of the German Urological Society (DGU) in pre-war Germany. He introduced excretion urography and a special TURP Instrument. In 1928 he was president of the 8th meeting held in the German capital Berlin. His Handbook of Urology, released by Ferdinand Springer publishing house, was a trendsetter in establishing urology as a specialty in Germany and bringing together the whole wisdom of all aspects of urology. He was the founder of the famous Maximilian Nitze Award of the DGU. As a Jew he-like many others-was forced to leave Nazi Germany after 1933. Even in Hungary, his native country, he again had to resist anti-Semitic hostility. Later on he lived in Mexico. Alexander von Lichtenberg has to be remembered with special focus on the exodus of German Jewish scientists during the Nazi time.

Balneologie und Syphilistherapie in Aachen

In unregelmasigen Abstanden sind verschiedene Bibliographien zu den Aachener und Burtscheider Quellen erschienen (Fromm 1890; Muller 1903; Wehsarg 1982). In jungerer Zeit erschien auch eine populare Ubersichtsarbeit uber Aachen und seine Bader (Vigener 2002). Dort, wie auch in dieser Arbeit, soll die medizinische Anwendung der Quellen in den Blick genommen werden, ihre Bedeutung im Handwerk und in der sich entwickelnden Industrie bleibt ausen vor.

German urologists under national socialism

ObjectivesThe first full-time professorship for urology at a German university was established in 1937 and in 1942, a rare teaching qualification (Habilitation) for urology was granted, both at the prestigious Berlin University. At the same time, nearly a third of all physicians who worked in the field of urology were classified as “non-Aryan” according to Nazi race laws and were forced out of their profession and their homeland. Many of them committed suicide or, if they refused to flee, were murdered in concentration camps. German urologists also contributed to compulsory sterilization of men according to the “law for the prevention of hereditarily diseased offspring” between 1934 and 1945.MethodsHistorical sources on the history of urology in Nazi Germany were reviewed and analyzed. These include textbooks and medical journals from the 1930s and 1940s, as well as files from different state and university archives.ResultsFor urologists, the changing political environment in Germany after 1933 offered possibilities to assert their personal and professional interests. Unfortunately, in many cases, moral principles were thrown overboard, and physicians advanced their own careers and the specialty of urology at the expense of their patients and their Jewish colleagues.ConclusionUnder national socialism, German urologists backed Nazi health and race policies and in exchange gained further professionalization for their specialty, including university positions and increased independence from surgery. Only in recent years has this chapter of German urology’s past become a topic of debate among members of the professional society.

Etablierung von Urologischen Universitätskliniken in NRW

ZusammenfassungDie Gründung universitärer und nichtuniversitärer urologischer Kliniken verlief sowohl in Ost- wie Westdeutschland in einer schwierigen Situation. Gerade der integralistische Standpunkt chirurgischer Ordinarien bis in die 1970er Jahre behinderte lange eine rasche Entwicklung. In Nordrhein-Westfalen wurden vielfach die Leiter von städtischen Krankenhausabteilungen (Aachen – Bochum/Herne) oder Oberärzte sich differenzierender chirurgischer Kliniken mit urologischer Expertise (Düsseldorf, Essen, Bonn, Köln) eingesetzt.AbstractThe foundation of university departments of urology in postwar East and West Germany faced some opposition by some university professors of surgery who wanted to preserve the unity of their discipline. In North Rhine–Westphalia, heads of municipal hospitals or senior members of university hospitals’ staff often received the first chaired professorships of urology.

FRI-12 MARY HELEN SCHIRM OF SAVANNAH, THE FIRST US PATIENT, WHO UNDERWENT INDICATED NEPHRECTOMY

quasi-randomized control studies investigated the effectiveness of cranberry juice, syrups, powders, capsules and tablets in preventing UTIs. An article published in 2000 and sponsored by Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc. presented a multitude of studies that suggest that regular consumption of cranberry juice cocktail reduces the risk of UTIs and inhibits bacterial adherence to mucosal surfaces. Cochrane reviews in 2000, 1998, 2004, and 2008 evaluated these studies and furthered the notion that there may be a decrease in symptomatic UTIs in women with recurrent infections over a 12-month period. However, the most recent update in 2012, which included 24 studies (14 more than 2008) and 4,473 participants suggested no statistically significant benefit in any high-risk group. Most recently, a study in JAMA found no benefit among women living in nursing homes. CONCLUSIONS: While a mechanism by which cranberry consumption may theoretically prevent UTIs has been proposed, and some research has suggested a benefit, a lack of strong evidence has left the most current medical opinion unable to justify proactive physician support of the practice.

FRI-14 URINARY FEVER: A FORGOTTEN CONCEPT IN UROLOGIC AND MEDICAL HISTORY

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: For a long time fever was recognized as a dangerous, if transitory, state of being. It was recognized as unhealthy, yet clearly it was not an unusual symptom. During the Enlightenment, the idea of fever became a means to acknowledge the biological experiences that united humans. During the 19th century there was a change to understand the condition not in unique characteristics and life events of the individual but in tools of laboratory and pathology. This was, perhaps not accidentally, the time when surgery and urology found a new scientific basis. Moffait in 1810 was one of the first to describe an irregular fever after catheterization. In 1832 Benjamin Brodie (1783 -1862) differentiated an acute and a chronic form. Henry Thompson (1820 -1904) in 1867 connected urinary fever to pyelonephritis. Felix Guyon (1831 -1920) who did extended research on the subject, discussed intoxication of non-infected urine and uro-sepsis by infection. E. L. Keyes (1843 -1924) in his widely red textbook wrote about therapy (quinine and morphine) and discussed several contemporary authors. METHODS: Time related sources from medical journals and textbooks and new results from the history of medicine from several libraries and archives from Europe and the United States with assistance of the W. P. Didusch Center for Urologic history were reviewed and analyzed in a hermeneutical manner. RESULTS: Fever charts and the nurse s role in attending the patient s head became requisites of the modern hospital and the thermometer was part of the profound change in objectification of disease in urology and medicine. CONCLUSIONS: The study is intended to suggest the dimensions of the fever concept had on the differentiating specialty of urology. In its general perspective, this contribution tries to understand the impact of changing medical concepts have in the history of urology from a transnational perspective.

Meine erste Begegnung mit der deutschen Urologie (1937)

A source in the archives of the German Society of Urology gives us a vivid insight into the situation in Berlin during the 1930s from the perspective of a young Polish doctor, and presents the situation at one of the leading urology institutions of the time in Germany. Furthermore, we learn about the social situation in hospitals as well as the discourse and networking taking place in the scientific community at that time.ZusammenfassungZur Analyse der Fachentwicklung spielen Originalquellen eine besondere Rolle. Während wissenschaftliche Publikationen des Stand der Wissenschaft zu einem bestimmten Zeitpunkt und die Haltung einzelner Protagonisten zu wissenschaftlichen Fragestellungen gut herausarbeiten, erlauben persönliche Lebenszeugnisse einen Einblick in die „Lebenswelt Krankenhaus“ oder auch persönliche wissenschaftliche Beziehungsgeflechte oder Entwicklungen von Themen.AbstractA source in the archives of the German Society of Urology gives us a vivid insight into the situation in Berlin during the 1930s from the perspective of a young Polish doctor, and presents the situation at one of the leading urology institutions of the time in Germany. Furthermore, we learn about the social situation in hospitals as well as the discourse and networking taking place in the scientific community at that time.