Publications of Jeffrey Baker :chronological combined listing:
%% Papers Published
@article{fds147890,
Author = {JP Baker},
Title = {Mercury, vaccines, and autism: one controversy, three
histories.},
Journal = {American journal of public health, United
States},
Volume = {98},
Number = {2},
Pages = {244-53},
Year = {2008},
Month = {February},
ISSN = {1541-0048},
Keywords = {Autistic Disorder • Brain • Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (U.S.) • Child • Child,
Preschool • Drug Industry • Health Policy •
History, 20th Century • History, 21st Century •
Humans • Infant • Mercury Poisoning •
Methylmercury Compounds • Preservatives, Pharmaceutical
• Public Opinion • Thimerosal • Trust •
United States • United States Food and Drug
Administration • Vaccines • adverse effects •
adverse effects* • drug effects • etiology* •
growth & development • history • history* •
standards},
Abstract = {The controversy regarding the once widely used
mercury-containing preservative thimerosal in childhood
vaccines has raised many historical questions that have not
been adequately explored. Why was this preservative
incorporated in the first place? Was there any real evidence
that it caused harm? And how did thimerosal become linked in
the public mind to the "autism epidemic"? I examine the
origins of the thimerosal controversy and their legacy for
the debate that has followed. More specifically, I explore
the parallel histories of three factors that converged to
create the crisis: vaccine preservatives, mercury poisoning,
and autism. An understanding of this history provides
important lessons for physicians and policymakers seeking to
preserve the public's trust in the nation's vaccine
system.},
Key = {fds147890}
}
@article{fds120629,
Author = {AF Robertson and JP Baker},
Title = {Lessons from the past.},
Journal = {Seminars in fetal & neonatal medicine, Netherlands},
Volume = {10},
Number = {1},
Pages = {23-30},
Year = {2005},
Month = {February},
ISSN = {1744-165X},
Keywords = {Benchmarking • Female • History, 18th Century
• History, 19th Century • History, 20th Century
• Humans • Iatrogenic Disease • Incubators,
Infant • Infant Care • Infant, Newborn •
Medical Errors • Neonatology • Pregnancy •
Risk Management • United States • history •
history*},
Abstract = {This article considers errors of care in neonatology. In the
19th century errors that resulted in high infant mortality
were shaped by the social environment, and in this setting
the development of the incubator failed. In the early 20th
century, with the emergence of the modern hospital as a
technological, science-driven system, physicians had more
control of patients' environments, and thus medical errors
could occur from systematic care and affected larger
numbers. Later in the 20th century, the development of
randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews began to
improve care and to decrease the risks associated with new
treatment methods. Large variations in practice still exist
between physicians as individuals and institutions.
Considering these variations as risks has led to the use of
institutional databases, benchmarking and clinical care
guidelines. The efficacy and safety of these methods is
unproven. Risks will never disappear from medicine. The
question of what risks are 'acceptable' is, in general,
unanswerable.},
Key = {fds120629}
}
@article{fds120630,
Title = {Baker, J.P., “Historical Adventures in the Newborn
Nursery: Forgotten Stories and Syndromes,” in Clio in the
Clinic: History in Medical Practice, ed. Jacalyn Duffin
(Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2005), pp.
105-115.},
Year = {2005},
Key = {fds120630}
}
@article{fds120622,
Author = {JP Baker and SL Katz},
Title = {Childhood vaccine development: an overview.},
Journal = {Pediatric research, United States},
Volume = {55},
Number = {2},
Pages = {347-56},
Year = {2004},
Month = {February},
ISSN = {0031-3998},
Keywords = {Bacterial Vaccines • Child • Communicable Disease
Control • Communicable Diseases • History, 20th
Century • History, 21st Century • Humans •
Vaccination • Viral Vaccines •
history*},
Abstract = {Vaccines against childhood diseases represent some of the
most important applications of 20th-century pediatric
research. This survey examines how the components of the
current U.S. immunization schedule emerged in three phases
during the course of the century. The first phase, after the
development of bacterial culture techniques, witnessed
numerous efforts in the early 1900s to develop bacterial
vaccines. It proved most fruitful with respect to
diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis. The rise of viral tissue
culture techniques in the 1950s brought about a second phase
of innovation resulting in vaccines against polio, measles,
mumps, rubella, and varicella. A third wave of innovation,
still very much alive, has drawn on a variety of new
technologies and led to vaccines against hepatitis B,
Haemophilus influenzae type b, pneumococcus, and still other
organisms. Although basic science research has thus been a
primary factor shaping the history of vaccine development,
the collaboration between the academic, private, and public
sectors critical to its application has not always proceeded
smoothly. The history of vaccine research and development
has important implications for today, as a variety of
factors threaten to fragment this network.},
Key = {fds120622}
}
@article{fds120624,
Author = {JP Baker},
Title = {The pertussis vaccine controversy in Great Britain,
1974-1986.},
Journal = {Vaccine, Netherlands},
Volume = {21},
Number = {25-26},
Pages = {4003-10},
Year = {2003},
Month = {September},
ISSN = {0264-410X},
Keywords = {Disease Outbreaks • Great Britain • History, 19th
Century • History, 20th Century • Humans •
Immunization Programs • Pertussis Vaccine •
Whooping Cough • adverse effects* • epidemiology
• history* • legislation & jurisprudence •
prevention & control},
Abstract = {This historical essay analyzes the role played by Great
Britain in the pertussis vaccine controversy of the 1970s
and 1980s. Public backlash against this vaccine not only
took place earlier in Britain than the United States, but
also was so widespread that a series of whooping cough
epidemics soon followed. As with the more recent dispute
involving measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine and autism,
the United Kingdom played a primary role in defining,
promoting, and ultimately exporting this controversy. This
essay seeks to explain this phenomenon by situating it in
Britain's long history of suspicion regarding vaccines
evident among both the public and the medical profession, a
theme dating back to the compulsory vaccination laws of the
19th century. It argues that anti-vaccinationism, far from
being simply a new development related to the public's lack
of awareness of childhood vaccine-preventable illness,
actually represents a revival of a much older
movement.},
Key = {fds120624}
}
@article{fds120631,
Title = { Baker, J.P. “Technology in the Nursery,” in Formative
Years: Children’s Health in the United States 1880-2000,
ed. Alexandra Minna Stern and Howard Markel (Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan, 2002)},
Year = {2002},
Key = {fds120631}
}
@article{fds120628,
Author = {JP Baker},
Title = {Immunization and the American way: 4 childhood
vaccines.},
Journal = {American journal of public health, UNITED
STATES},
Volume = {90},
Number = {2},
Pages = {199-207},
Year = {2000},
Month = {February},
ISSN = {0090-0036},
Keywords = {Biomedical and Behavioral Research • Health Care and
Public Health • Twentieth Century},
Abstract = {Childhood immunization constitutes one of the great success
stories of American public health in the 20th century. This
essay provides a historical examination of this topic
through 4 particularly important examples: diphtheria,
pertussis, polio, and measles. Each case study illustrates
how new vaccines have posed unique challenges related to
basic science, clinical trial methodology, medical ethics,
and public acceptance. A brief comparison of each story to
the experience of Great Britain, however, suggests an
underlying unity connecting all 4 examples. Whereas the
British led the way in introducing formal clinical trial
methodology in the field of immunization development, the
Americans excelled in the rapid translation of laboratory
knowledge into strategies suitable for mass application.
Although this distinction appears to have diminished in
recent years, it offers insight into the sources of
creativity underlying American vaccine development and the
corresponding difficulties sometimes created for utilizing
vaccines fruits rationally.},
Key = {fds120628}
}
@article{fds120618,
Title = {Book Review: Heather Munro Prescott, A Doctor of Their Own:
The History of Adolescent Medicine. Bulletin of the History
of Medicine 74 (2000): 409-410},
Year = {2000},
Key = {fds120618}
}
@article{fds120621,
Author = {JP Baker},
Title = {The birth of bioethics.},
Journal = {Pediatrics, UNITED STATES},
Volume = {104},
Number = {1 Pt 1},
Pages = {107},
Year = {1999},
Month = {July},
ISSN = {0031-4005},
Keywords = {Bioethics • Books* • Ethics, Medical •
History, 20th Century • United States •
history*},
Key = {fds120621}
}
@article{fds120617,
Title = {Book Review: Murdina Desmond, Newborn Medicine and Society.
Bulletin of the History of Medicine 73 (1999):
743-744},
Year = {1999},
Key = {fds120617}
}
@article{fds120627,
Author = {JP Baker},
Title = {Reinventing a specialty: how Pediatrics survived its own
success.},
Journal = {Pediatrics, UNITED STATES},
Volume = {102},
Number = {1 Pt 2},
Pages = {197-200},
Year = {1998},
Month = {July},
ISSN = {0031-4005},
Keywords = {Child • History, 20th Century • Humans •
Pediatrics • Periodicals • United States •
history*},
Key = {fds120627}
}
@article{fds120619,
Title = {Baker, Jeffrey P. The Machine in the Nursery: Incubator
Technology and the Origins of Newborn Intensive Care
(Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press,
1996)},
Year = {1996},
Key = {fds120619}
}
@article{fds120616,
Title = {Plenary Session, American Association for the History of
Medicine, April 1995. \"Newborn Intensive Care as a
Technological System.\"},
Year = {1995},
Key = {fds120616}
}
@article{fds120623,
Author = {JP Baker},
Title = {Women and the invention of well child care.},
Journal = {Pediatrics, UNITED STATES},
Volume = {94},
Number = {4 Pt 1},
Pages = {527-31},
Year = {1994},
Month = {October},
ISSN = {0031-4005},
Keywords = {Child Health Services • Child Welfare • History,
19th Century • History, 20th Century • Humans
• Infant • Infant, Newborn • Pediatrics
• Physicians, Women • Primary Prevention •
Public Health • United States • Women •
history • history*},
Key = {fds120623}
}
@article{fds120626,
Author = {JP Baker},
Title = {The incubator controversy: pediatricians and the origins of
premature infant technology in the United States, 1890 to
1910.},
Journal = {Pediatrics, UNITED STATES},
Volume = {87},
Number = {5},
Pages = {654-62},
Year = {1991},
Month = {May},
ISSN = {0031-4005},
Keywords = {History, 19th Century • History, 20th Century •
Humans • Incubators, Infant • Infant, Newborn
• Infant, Premature* • Pediatrics* •
Technology, Medical • United States •
history*},
Key = {fds120626}
}
@article{fds120620,
Title = {Mauro, R.D., Baker, J., and Mackedonski, V. "A Five-year-old
Girl with Acute Renal Failure and Multiple Cerebral
Infarctions." Journal of Pediatrics 115 (1989):816-823.},
Year = {1989},
Key = {fds120620}
}
@article{fds120625,
Author = {JP Baker},
Title = {The incubator and the medical discovery of the premature
infant.},
Journal = {Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California
Perinatal Association, UNITED STATES},
Volume = {20},
Number = {5},
Pages = {321-8},
ISSN = {0743-8346},
Keywords = {France • History, 19th Century • History, 20th
Century • Humans • Incubators • Infant •
Infant, Newborn • Infant, Premature* • Neonatology
• United States • history*},
Abstract = {The invention of the incubator in 1880 ignited a dramatic
outpouring of popular and professional excitement over the
prospect of reducing premature infant mortality. Yet the
technology itself progressed slowly and fitfully over the
next 50 years. The story is worth examining not so much from
the standpoint of technological progress, but from the
perspective of how responsibility for the newborn shifted
from mothers to obstetricians and eventually pediatricians.
It also illustrates how the history of technology involves
more than invention. The invention of the incubator itself
was less significant than the development of a system to
support the device.},
Key = {fds120625}
}