The Laboratory and Clinic: The Debate over Clinical Trials in Bombay, 1897–1908

Abstract At the end of the nineteenth century, bubonic plague broke out in Bombay (Mumbai), and the European powers were terrified that it would spread to Europe. Many scientists and doctors from around the world were sent to Bombay to conduct research and trials on potential cures for the plague. For decades, scholars have examined the intersection of the laboratory and clinic and debated whether or not science and medicine clashed during the bacteriological revolution. While many historians now argue that there was no inherent conflict between the two approaches, they neglect the laboratory and clinic in the colonies. In this paper, I examine two case studies demonstrating the fluidity of laboratory and clinic boundaries. Yet, the intersection of the two also brought conflict over how to conduct clinical trials with laboratory-produced serums. During this period, the clinic remained paramount in Great Britain, but was subordinated to the laboratory in colonial Bombay.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Social History of Medicine
Published
2025-11-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/shm/hkaf104
Primary Topic
History of Medicine and Tropical Health
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Laboratory and Clinic: The Debate over Clinical Trials in Bombay, 1897–1908

Kalman Rotstein
Social History of Medicine
History of Medicine and Tropical Health
article

The Laboratory and Clinic: The Debate over Clinical Trials in Bombay, 1897–1908

Kalman Rotstein
article en

Abstract

Abstract At the end of the nineteenth century, bubonic plague broke out in Bombay (Mumbai), and the European powers were terrified that it would spread to Europe. Many scientists and doctors from around the world were sent to Bombay to conduct research and trials on potential cures for the plague. For decades, scholars have examined the intersection of the laboratory and clinic and debated whether or not science and medicine clashed during the bacteriological revolution. While many historians now argue that there was no inherent conflict between the two approaches, they neglect the laboratory and clinic in the colonies. In this paper, I examine two case studies demonstrating the fluidity of laboratory and clinic boundaries. Yet, the intersection of the two also brought conflict over how to conduct clinical trials with laboratory-produced serums. During this period, the clinic remained paramount in Great Britain, but was subordinated to the laboratory in colonial Bombay.

Social History of Medicine
Binghamton University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 10%
History of Medicine and Tropical Health
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

The Laboratory and Clinic: The Debate over Clinical Trials in Bombay, 1897–1908 — Kalman Rotstein · Social History of Medicine (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS