Anne Hardy,<i>Salmonella Infections, Networks of Knowledge, and Public Health in Britain, 1880–1975</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this fascinating book, firmly grounded in a wide range of published source material, Anne Hardy traces the knowledge of Salmonella infections in humans and animals in the century after germ theory. Hardy covers a lot of terrain: new scientific theories, new scientific techniques and methods, new levels of state capacity and engagement, new kinds of gastronomic and hygienic tastes and habits, and last but certainly not least new ways of raising, processing, distributing, selling, preparing and even eating animals. She organises her material by dividing the book into three partially overlapping sections. The first—‘Pathways in Nature’—traces the slowly developing awareness of the various means beyond contaminated water and milk by which Salmonella caused disease. In successive chapters, Hardy explores the role of human carriers, shellfish, flies, duck eggs and other animals. These chapters are important for their role in the story of Salmonella food poisoning, but she also uses them to explore particular historical debates on, for example, the relevance of human carriers and the evidence for the role of flies in the transmission (and decline) of summer diarrhoea. Uniting all examples in this section is a focus on the significance of the laboratory for public health practice. Taking up Michael Worboys's call, Hardy shows that the laboratory was an ambiguous resource for public health practitioners.1 Tried and true epidemiological methods were the backbone of outbreak investigation, and at best the laboratory confirmed what had already been established by other means (p. 113). Bacteriology did not play an important until the mid-1930s (p. 36).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".