Florence Nightingale

"There are no specific diseases only specific disease conditions"---Florence Nightingale.

She said of 'infection':
    Diseases are not individuals arranged in classes, like cats and dogs, but conditions growing out of one another.
    Is it not living in a continual mistake to look upon diseases as we do now, as separate entities, which must exist, like cats and dogs, instead of looking upon them as conditions, like a dirty and a clean condition, and just as much under our control; or rather as the reactions of kindly nature, against the conditions in which we have placed ourselves?
    I was brought up to believe that smallpox, for instance, was a thing of which there was once a first specimen in the world, which went on propagating itself, in a perpetual chain of descent, just as there was a first dog, (or a first pair of dogs) and that smallpox would not begin itself, any more than a new dog would begin without there having been a parent dog.
    Since then I have seen with my own eyes and smelled with my own nose smallpox growing up in first specimens, either in closed rooms or in overcrowded wards, where it could not by any possibility have been 'caught', but must have begun.
    I have seen diseases begin, grow up, and pass into one another. Now, dogs do not pass into cats.
    I have seen, for instance, with a little overcrowding, continued fever grow up; and with a little more, typhoid fever; and with a little more, typhus, and all in the same ward or hut.
    Would it not be far better, truer, and more practical, if we looked upon disease in this light (for diseases, as all experience shows, are adjectives, not noun-substantives):
    - True nursing ignores infection, except to prevent it. Cleanliness and fresh air from open windows, with unremitting attention to the patient, are the only defence a true nurse either asks or needs.
    - Wise and humane management of the patient is the best safeguard against infection. The greater part of nursing consists of preserving cleanliness.
    - The specific disease doctrine is the grand refuge of weak, uncultured, unstable minds, such as now rule in the medical profession. There are no specific diseases; there are specific disease conditions.
    Here you have Florence Nightingale, one of the most famous nurses in history, after life-long experience with infection, contagion and epidemics, challenging the germ theory 17 years before Pasteur put it forward as his own discovery! (See Ch.8, p.61).
    She clearly understood it and its utter fallacy better before 1860 than Pasteur did, either in 1878 or later! [1940] The Dream & Lie of Louis Pasteur by R. B. Pearson (originally Pasteur, Plagiarist, Imposter)

I am currently preparing a keynote presentation on the endobiont, and must therefore touch upon the conflict between Pasteur and Béchamp. While checking every reference in "The Dream and Lie of Pasteur" on your website I noticed that Florence Nightingale is misquoted. At least so it seems.

That it was widely known is indicated by the fact that the world-famous English nurse, Florence Nightingale, published an attack on the idea in 1860, over 17 years before Pasteur adopted it and claimed it as his own. (http://www.whale.to/a/b/pearson.html)She said of 'infection': ...

The main part of the quote can be found in three different parts of "Notes on nursing" from 1860. So it is a constructed quote, but as it appears, it will not give a false impression of her opinion. The last paragraph however, I cannot find anywhere. This is the paragraph:

"The specific disease doctrine is the grand refuge of weak, uncultured, unstable minds, such as now rule in the medical profession. There are no specific diseases; there are specific disease conditions."

It is quoted on a few webpages on the internet, and those who reveal sources claim that it originates from "Notes on nursing", but that does not appear to be true.

I thought I'd just let you know so that you could publish a note informing the readers. Because the truth is of such a controversial nature, it is important that the quality of evidence is the best.

Kind regards,

Joakim Øien Iversen