Question

--Were the chances greater or less of a 19th century woman dying from puerperal fever compared to a

woman from the 20th Century?

Defend your answer.

--What about contracting human papilloma virus?

Defend your answer.

--What about dying from syphilis?

Defend your answer.

--What about dying from tuberculosis?

Defend your answer.

Answer 1

Ans.) Yes, the chances were greater of a 19th century woman dying from puerperal fever compared to a woman from the 20th Century. This is due to the fact that in 20th century treatment of puerperal fever was much improved hence mortality is reduced. The hygienic condition during child birth at the health care center advanced a lot.

Reason is not very clear but unfortunately, there is an increased possibility of human papilloma virus infection in 20^th century than the 19^th century.

Up until the mid twentieth century the most mainstream hypothesis on the initiation of syphilis was that it was a disease. That sporadic syphilis existed in classical times and even in ancient occasions is very inside the scope of likelihood. Now with the new precautionary measure, it has been controlled initially in 20^th century. As the incidence of syphilis among US women have remained constant during this time, but though it has been increased UK women have increased. But by the emergence of new techniques of microbiology and pharmacology it is easier to detect the symptoms of syphilis which also become less rigorous over the 19th and 20th centuries.

Sadly for nineteenth century New Englanders, the infection by tuberculosis was not surely knew. By the beginning of the nineteenth century, tuberculosis had killed one out of seven surprisingly that had ever lived. But in 20th century the death rate reduced largely by the availability of new drugs.

.