But the concept of "infection" did not even exist then. Diseases were named by their outward signs: plague was the black death, cholera the blue death, or by their symptoms: jaundice, consumption, tetanus, whooping cough, poliomyelitis - polio. Rarely the name included a supposed cause, such as venereal disease (from the goddess of love Venus) or malaria - "bad (mala) air (aria)", but even these quasi-pathogenetic explanations, as it turned out later, were taken literally from the air.
From today's point of view, this situation is quite strange, because microorganisms have been known since the time of Galileo. As early as 1676, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek described in detail their microscopic diversity and presence in the human body, but medicine at that time did not associate microorganisms with disease, as they seemed to be everywhere.
The situation changed dramatically when isolated species were successfully cultivated and studied one by one. It was progressively realized that some bacteria can be correlated with specific diseases or conditions. With the establishment of causality, diseases caused and carried by bacteria were called infections. An era of exciting discovery of more and more pathogens and the search for ways to control them began. As a result of targeted infection control, human life expectancy doubled in just 50 years and the incidence of incurable bacterian infectious diseases fell to zero.
Today it is believed that people hardly ever die from infectious diseases in developed countries. But is it true, or is medicine as wrong, as it was 200 years ago? After all, doctors in those days were quite enlightened, and even today we are surrounded by many microbial diseases, that medicine, like two hundred years ago, describes and treats only by symptoms and does not consider as infections. Tonsillitis, appendicitis, colitis, diverticulitis, stomatitis, periodontitis, phlegmon, bacterial vaginosis - what do we know about these diseases? Only that there is no way around bacteria. Treatment is the same as before the XVIII century, purely empirical, "by eye" and even surgical. Surprisingly, even in the XXI century we try to defend ourselves with a knife against invisible enemies - is it not a paradox?