SUCCESS CRITERIA:

 Introduction
 Refers to all the sources mentioned by the question
 Quotes from the sources and uses supporting evidence from
the sources
 Uses/includes own knowledge
 Includes a balanced argument
 May make inferences
 May discuss the reliability of the sources
 Includes a conclusion/most important reason

Why it could be argued that opposition to new ideas was the main
reason surgery changed so slowly. I will also discuss other reasons
why it could be argued surgery changed so slowly but I will also
challenge the question and discuss why it could be suggested that
actually surgery did not change slowly at all.

In some ways opposition to new ideas was the main reason surgery
changed so slowly 1845-1918. For example, in source C it talks about
one Professor Syme who think Carbolic Spray wasn’t great because
of ‘..the delays it causes and the lack of certainty over its
effectiveness…’ This suggests that opposition to new ideas was the
main reason surgery changed slowly. For example, when Carbolic
Spray was introduced by Lister many people did not like the change
because it created more work and because they did not believe in
germs. The doctors used to joke to one another that they should
close the door so none of Mr Lister’s germs could get in. Many
people are conservative and do not like change. Using my own
knowledge, when Simpson introduced anesthetics I know many
people rejected them because they were religious and felt people
should experience pain-especially women during childbirth.
However, in other ways it could be suggested that opposition to new
ideas was not the main reason why surgery changed slowly. Many
doctors and health professionals had real reasons for not adopting
new methods. For example, in source E talking about X-Rays, it
argues that ‘…medical students should develop proper skills in
diagnosis ...’ suggesting that although X-Rays were good doctors still
needed to develop proper skills of diagnosis. X-Rays could highlight
the problem in patients but could not fix the problem if the doctor
did not know what they were doing. Using my own knowledge, I
know that many did not like anaesthetics because they were worried
about what could happen to their patients. For example, some
patients, especially the young, overdosed and there was the famous
case of Hannah Greener who was killed when having a simple
operation to have her toenail removed.

In some ways, it could be argued that surgery did not change slowly.
Considering the long development of medicine, surtgery actually
changed in quite a short period of time. For example, source G talks
about how ‘..Face masks, rubber gloves, surgical gowns and the
abandonment of the huge public operating theatre – all these
slashed infection in the 1890s…’ So, in actual fact a huge number of
developments were made in a very short space of time.

In conclusion, in some ways it could be argued that opposition to

new ideas was the main reason why surgery changed slowly. For
example, many people did not want to use anesthetics because they
felt people should experience pain. However, this essay has argued
that opposition to new ideas was not the main reason surgery
changed slowly. The most important reason for this is that some had
valid reasons for opposition-such as new ideas and technology didn’t
instantly make the person a better doctor. Indeed, it could be
suggested that surgery didn’t even change that slowly when we
consider the overall development of medicine which took hundreds
of years.