Infectious Historians InfectiousHistorians

Philippa Nicole Barr (Australia National University) speaks to the Infectious Historians about her work on the public emotions surrounding the outbreak of the third plague pandemic in Australia. Philippa frames the discussion by providing some background about Australia at the turn of the 20th century and how plague reached Australia and led to the 1900 outbreak. She then explains the methods she used writing her book, looking at the history of emotions. The conversation them moves to examine the strategic mobilization of emotion in 1900 - especially in context of the confusion with how plague worked. Philipa speaks specifically about disgust, often through describing things, places and people as disgusting by being ‘dirty’ or associated with ‘dirt’. The invocation of something as dirty could lead to attempts to ameliorate this condition, for example by big sanitation campaigns. Plague, Philippa argues, catalyzed emotional and political responses at the time. 

Michelle Pfeffer (University of Oxford) comes on the podcast to present her work on astrology in the context of the second plague pandemic. The conversation begins with a brief discussion of the second plague pandemic and some of the cultural reactions to it. Michelle then speaks about public health and the question of its origins, before moving into astrology as a complex body of theory. She points out that astrology and medicine were quite close in both theory and practice. Michelle also discusses how in the early modern period astrology moved from being an elite product to a more democratic process, and draws some similarities between astrology and data gathering and epidemiology. The final part of the conversation covers Michelle’s exhibition as a form of outreach. Michelle recounts how she put it together and about some of the responses that she had received. 

Jason Opal (McGill University) joins the Infectious Historians. Jason begins by discussing the massive impact of disease on the Americas between the 15th and 18th centuries, while also acknowledging the realization of this history in the 1970s. He also touches upon the concept of “virgin soil” epidemics. The second part of the episode focuses on inoculation against smallpox in Europe, the colonies and elsewhere. Jason discusses how inoculation was done and the different ways in which it was adopted. He also touches upon the relevance of measles to this story. The last part of the interview discusses teaching epidemics, as Jason shares with Merle and Lee how he teaches disease.

Neeraja Sankaran (National Centre for Biological Sciences-TIFR) and Stephen Weldon (University of Oklahoma) join the Infectious Historians to discuss a recent special journal issue they edited. The issue includes many studies about histories of disease, pandemics and their impact around the world and across time, and reflections on how people have studies these events in the past. Neeraja and Stephen begin by telling the story of how they decided to put out the special issue, and reflect on some of their early choices and how those determined the shape of the final outcome. They discuss the question of how to measure the impact of this issue, and share how the editing work has influenced their own thinking on these issues. The conversation then moves on to discuss teaching courses on pandemics, before wrapping up with another reflection, this time on the impacts of Covid on how people write about disease. 

Arafaat Valiani (University of Oregon) has a conversation with the Infectious Historians about genomic and genetic research with indigenous communities. Arafaat goes over what is genomic research, then describes how tests work and the bioethical debate surrounding them. He describes some of the different approaches among biomedical researchers that approach marginalized communities. The conversation moves on to discuss some of the practicalities of working with and within these communities, followed by a reflection about whether other communities should adopt similar practices as well. The interview finishes with a discussion of the role of AI within genomic research.

Keith Pluymers (Illinois State University) comes on the show to talk about his work on late 18th century Philadelphia in the context of yellow fever and climate. After the introductory remarks and the personal updates, Keith begins with a discussion of the Anthropocene and its broader relevance as well as its connection to his field of studies. He continues to discuss climate and disease in the New World, as well as in the context of how science and empirical measurements were done in the past. Keith provides several examples that demonstrate how 18th century people believed they could exert some influence over the weather, atmosphere or even climate. This then ties into the yellow fever discussion, which he contextualizes within the broader discourse in Philadelphia but also broader trans-Atlantic discourse.