Denise's Discussion Questions

History- Some discussion in Tomes’ book is devoted to the gospel of germs being embraced by those who are interested in profiting from these new scientific ideas. How important are these commercial actors in the story of the acceptance of the germ theory? Would the evolution of these ideas about germs be different if others, like scientists or doctors, had been the only ones to disseminate information to the public?

Historiography- In her introduction, Tomes states that one of her goals is to “challenge the implicitly gendered division of knowledge that regards as significant what Pasteur did in the laboratory but dismisses as inconsequential what a public health nurse or housewife did with his insights” (16). Do you think that parts of this work could be considered a successful gender history? Or is it just purely a social/ medical history with elements that are gender related? In the other books we read, like Enstad, women were able to show their agency in ways that were often ignored by other historians. Is this the case for Tomes’ work as well? -For this question I want to be clear that I am not assuming that the sole purpose of this book is to put forth an argument about germ theory and the role of women. I am merely interested in hearing thoughts about this gendered aspect that Tomes suggests in her quote.