EVALUATION OF TWO SOVIET MEDICAL BOOKS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP82-00047R000200810001-8
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 5
• Document Creation Date: December 23, 2016
• Document Release Date: April 18, 2013
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: May 14, 1953
• Content Type: REPORT

Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/11/04: CIA-RDP82-00047R000200810001-8
%-,I-J1`.),) I I I Lin' 1%/11 bEiL;Xtta/ D.CAL;M111'.1 %/nom-,
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY REPORT
INFORMATION REPORT CD NO.
COUNTRY
USSR
DATE DISTR./ l OX1673
SUBJECT Evaluation of Two Soviet Medical Books NO OF PAGES 5
50X1 LACE
ACQUIRED
DATE
ACQU I RED
THIS 000UMINT CONTAINS INFORMATION AFFECTING THE NATIONAL DEFENSE
CR THE UNITIO STATES, WITHIN TNI DISMISS OR TITI.S fer. 7,3
AND 794, OP THE U.S. CODE, AS AMINDEO, ITS 88888 MISSION OR PEON.
LOTION OF ITS CONTENT. TO OR ISCIIPT ST AN UNAUTHORIIIS PERSON IS
PRomiSITSo BY LAW. THE RIPRODUCTION OS THIS FORM II FSOPIISITED.
- NO. OF ENCLS.
(LISTED BELOW)
SUPPLEMENT TO
REPORT NO.
THIS IS UNEVALUATED INFORMAT ON
two Soviet Medical books
Issledovania Otechestvennykh Uchenykh 50X1
0 Vozbuditelyakh Maiyarii by V I Afanas'yev, V YaiD.2.111.2122 I I MechnilLovj
D LRADmanovskiy, N A Sakharov, (Medgiz 1951); and Ocherki Ratsional'noy
KhiraioteraLLi by I A Kassyskib (Medgiz 1951)j
PART I - General Remarks on Soviet Medical Literature
1. The value of any book in the opinion of the Soviet rulers depends not only on
the factual material it contains but also on its theoretical evaluation. Soviet
methods are deductivn and theory dominates in a way similar to that in which
theology formerly dominated and "theory" might be called the new Soviet theology.
Facts not supporting the theory which at any time is popular with the Soviet
leaders are automatically false. The leading theory governing all Soviet
activity including medicine is, of course, that of d:atectical materialism
It is interesting, however, to examine tne
development of Soviet medical teory within the general frimework of dialectical
materialism. During the early 1920's the dominant postulate or theory was the
"social hygiene" theory and all medical activity was evaluated in terms of its
contribution to this In the 1930's this,theory was replaced by new
theories of active treatment such as the use of omnipotent drugs. One example
Of these theories as that of the Bulgarian physician,
who proposed the treatment of everything with lysins. This physician
was supported by Molotov and his theory was therefore very popular.- Eventually, 51
A
hOWever, the theory became unpopular and he was himself executed. Immediately
prior to World War II there were two theories more or less vying with each other
for official approval. The first of these is Speranski's, who said that all 50X1
vital processes both physiological and pathological are dependent upon the
of the sub-cortical cerebral centers. Some parts of Speranski's theory
were, of courses sound and ,his book was published in the US, it 1935.
50X1
50X1
50X1
'CLASSIFICATION SECRET/SECURITY INFORMATION
50X1
DISTRIBUTION
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/11/04: CIA-RDP82-00047R000200810001-8
,
Declassified in Part-Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/11/04: CIA-RDP82-00047R000200810001-8
SECRET/SECURITY INPORMATION
- 2 -
50X1
The second theory was that of Bogomolets, who said that priority in vital
processes belongs to, the system of connective tissue. Both these dogmatic
theories, which were partially stworted by experimental findings, found
patrons in the Kremlin.
2. Apparently after World War II, Bogomolets was defeated in the war of theories
and, of course, he died in 1946 or 1947. Nevertheless, Speranski's theory
underwent some radical changes. It was eventually replaced by a new dogma
called. "Pavlov's Neurism". A very important meeting of the Soviet Academy
of Science was held in Moscow in 1950 and the new dogma was officially pro-
claimed and since that time everyone has had. to follow its postulates. In
this connection it is very peculiar how the Soviet rulersadapted,and to some
extent faked,the world-renowned results of the valuable scientific activities
of Pavlov. One example of this is that they have ascribed to Pavlov" state-
ments about the control of somatic functions in the body by psychic processes,
namely by conditioned reflexes, and that these reflexes can be artifically
established to conform to the conditions of the Communist society with resulting
transformations in the personality, adaptability and health of the people.
3. Another theory that was officiallY:recognized was Eyssenkols which is an
exageration of Darwin's .postulate concerned with the variability of animal
species , Lyssenko claimed' that 'hereditary f6dtors could. be tasily- changed
and adapted to the demands of the sobialist state.
4.
Both the above theories are ohligat611-�ed'.-01YrstientifiC'researCherand every
scientific book must have enotations-from.these-theories---ii its ecp1a.na.tions
of observed
5. Anbther' interesting peculiarity -"of post-World' War II Soviet medicine is
increased emphasis, on the activities of native researchers, These are divided
into two ce-7'sposorieiss�-� (a)- scientii3ts frosf pre- evolutionary times who are
now sa,llednstennestvennyy" scientists � I translated "fatherland's"
PO,entietsfr and (b) Sae/II:Oita developed under the Soviet system, It should
be remembered that pre-revolutionary Russian medicine "began to -develop in the.
Addle of:Usti century, in other Words, later than Western -European medicine
.nut approXiMately the same time as .US medicine, 1-n made slow progressbut
nevertheless it hsq, Some achieVementS,..uSually not very well known outside
the lislesian eir The reasons .for this Were the language barrier and. the
ct that Russian medical magazines were iiot popular and were -scarce in number.
In other words it had no publicity. As a res4t; western medicine, which was
more advanced and had. more .traditionss used t loOk -down On any Russian
scientl�Pic activity. In addition, the Old. Russianl scientists -were very
Modest and. as a result, their'haelsrdneast may have been overestimated. After
World War I there could be observed some unsound chauvinistic tendencies :
especially in France and. Germany as far, as .medicine.is concerned. �Oerman-
ecientists, for example, did. not study the stork of,French-scientists- and vice
versa. British medicine Was rather suspicious- Of any workdone on the con-
tinent and remained. rather aldcif"; All, however, refused to take any notice
of Soviet medicine at all.
. :In the 1920s� the Soviet rUlera preferred to-itport scientists, technicians,
ideas and machines from capitalist countries and:criticized:former Russian
,itutions as much as possible. ,T4iepoliey.changed in the 1930-s In order
tibl#484,e the common people for war and the leaders 'started to dialti'vate
patridtic'tnings. As part of this policy their began to point out that the-
aChievementof the scientists of old Russia, in every field. including medicine,
vere considerable and many pamphlets and newspaper articles were published con-
cerning med,kicalcscientists of the past.
PART II Vy shchiyesIssledovatechestvennk.hUchenykh 2212mhollitelyslsn
Nalyaril'
7. the above background information, much of which is, of course,
well known, has much to do with the form of the two Soviet medical 50X1
books under diiCussion. This is particularly true of the first:
50X1
50X1
SECRET/SECURITY INFORMATION
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/11/04: CIA-RDP82-00047R000200810001-8
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/11/04: CIA-RDP82-00047R000200810001-8
SECRET/SECURITY INFORMATION
- 3 -
Veydayushchiyesya IreeledovaniyaeOtechestvennykh Uchenykh 0 Vozbuditelyakh Mal rii
(Distinguished Investigations of the Fatherland's Scientists on Malaria Germs
This book can be divided into three parts. The last part is composed of excerpts
from original works dealing with the subject which were written and published in
pre-revolutionary time. Another section (Chapters 3, 4, 5, and 6) is a historical
survey of investigations performed both in old Russia and in foreign countries in
this field. This section was, written by s competent woman author
named S G Vasina. The first sention of the book (the preface, Chaptere 1 and 2)
-"--11P-1-1---as�ellalatertteriberer".uth9rnedDamN Zasukhin
8. the part played by the old Russian scientists
in the discovery of the malaria parasite was very important and is underestimated
in western countries. The original work of these scientists as presented in
this book is very spectacular in this respect. pr Zasukhin attempts in his
section to speculate On this underestimation. He states that French,. German
and British scientists of the 19th Century quoted Russian scientists very often
and that as far as the UK and'US are concerned, this interest, in Rustian work
persisted until shortly before World War I when such classical books on the
subject as those of Craig (us) and Rose (1K) appeared. At this time, Russian
literature was discussed rather thoroughly although not without some omissions.
� In the analagous books of Warshaw and Boyd, however; which appeared in the US
in 1949, no mention is made of Soviet work. ,Zasukhin concludes that it will
surprise no one that "now, when the capitalists of the US and UK and some other
countries are making preparations for the new gangster war 'against the Soviet
Union and the people's demooracies, ideological methods re. used.by them as
one of the forms of the preparation." ee also states that "capitalistic
scientists do everything possible to borrow and utilize all the valuable and
importatt contributions from the Works of the old Rnssian scientists and at the
same time show that the contemporary science of medicine in the USSR is based
merely on the achievements of the capitalistic scientistss" and further "they
try to emphasize the inferiority of the Soviet people and its scientists. Of
course, the reactionary Tsarist rulers contributed a great deal to the lack
of knowledge abroad of the works of the Russian sdientists in the field of
malaria." He further states "even now international conceptions are popular
among Soviet sdientists; they must be overcome," and finally "based on the
tremendous and ever increasing power of our country, the achievements of
scientistss,taking into account the considerable eXperience of the pasts
and armed with the mOst advanced. theories of Marx, Engels,. Lenin and ,Ealla,
Soviet scientists and workers can be sure of the future In contrast to thiss
no progress in the fight against 'malaria cat.be possible in capitalistic
cOuntries as their rulers have,no interest in the condition of life of the
worker." These quotations reveal the true purpose of the book which ,might
be described as a form of psychological warfare having as its goal .the abandon-
ment by contemporary Soviet scientists of the admiration for the scientists of
the West. This attack takes several forms. It attempts to prove that toe:
large extent 'Western science is based on Russian achievements .IA, attempts
':.to show that Western scientists have nothing but contempt fOr Soviets scientists.
PART III - Ocherki Ratsional'noy Khimioterapii
9. -Although the author. of Ocherkillatsional!no KhimiOterapii it not a:party mans
and. he Seems competent itehis'fields the general remarks tadeaboVe are also,
to a certain extent,. applicable to his book.. It is very interesting for
exaMplete tote that in the preface he says: "the conferende of the Academy
of Science in 1950. which was devoted to the physiological doctrine of
Pavlov helped the author in the understanding and discussion of some questions
of the'theb07_and,practice.of themotheram. However, the writer believes
that his theoretic points of view are far from the complete truth and that
the criticism of some of his explanations would be very helpful." He starts
his book with more or less a history of Chemotherapy. He states that scientific
chemOetherapyeis associated with advances in organic Chemistry j.Ferethis reason
SECRET/SECURITY INFORMATION
50X1
50X1
50X1
50X1
50X1
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/11/04: CIA-RDP82-00047R000200810001-8
ow"'
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/11/04: CIA-RDP82-00047R000200810001-8
.SECRET/SECURITTINFORMATION
- -
he mentions the names of a number. Of distinguished chemists of prerevolutionary
Russia, even 'though their activity prObably was nOt closely connected with chemo-
herapy. Later on inthe book he emphasizes the significance of some of the
works Of Romatovski and states that in 1936 PostoVaki synthesized sulfapyridite-
fOur months before Evans' discovery. He further states that the history of
aptibiotios-: should begin with the observations of the famoUs Russian clinicians
Mannassein and'PolotebnoV. In 1868 1871 they examined the antibacterial
action of the 'mold penicillium and treated skin ulcers with mold with good
results.' In 1904, he states, Tartakovski observed good. results with the use
_ofpenIcilliumglaucum on fowl typhus.. These observations did not attract
any attention and 'were forgotten. The writer gives'a very objective discussion
of Fleming't work and., the development of penicillin. He does not claim that
Fletingis Work is based.on Work by the Russians tamed above.
10. Re also'mentionsas being very important the investigations conducted by
Vinogradski concerned with soil-baCteria and protista and their antagonism.
SiMilar itVestigatiOns.were-the basis for the discovery oftyrothrycine by
DUbois in the'US'it 19384 Re'states'that KrasilftikoV established the anti-
bacterial action OfActinomyded'and Shortly thereafter Waksnen (us) discovered
streptomycin.,
11. The ,'tyle of this book is eoMpletely-different"from Zasdkhin� being:that of a
regular scientific work. Following the historical section, the author furnishes
a Chapter dealing with general' OhemOtherapy which is -a very good, up-to-date
description of all known facts.. The Only:peCuldarity Of'thia:Chapter is that
the author furnishes in it manyinapproPriate,qudtations from Pavlov. The next
Oapter discusses contemporary 'treatment of malaria. It is worth notilig that
Soviet medicine does not use quinine', probably bedause it has to be imported.
and is expensive.. The author recommends -a combination ofbigumal-(tho Soviet
equivalent of paludrine)� acridbin' (Soviet atabrin )4 and plastodyd'(Soviet
plasmochin). Be-alto-recoMmetds. the followitg:brft.tments:-
Disease
Leishmaniasis : PreParationa of attimotYlnamely, stibbsan or suramixte
-
Recurrent fever Either nOvarsenol (heotalvaisan) or penicillin.
Visceral Lues The cha.ter concerned withthis disease is written,
rather superficially. It should be
mentioned however that the Soviets have not only
the Old fashioned neoSalvarsan but alsomapharsen
which 1e call Sovarsen. Apparently _Penicillin is
useditfrequettly and the "writer MentionS many
disadvantages of its use in the treatment of lues.
The use of the old fashiOned etetit and Sitviet
mOdifIcations of.the'GerMan yatren'. "
Thejaritcipal treatment of this disease described
--by:theauthor is the- use of the sulfa drugs, namely
sulfathiazole and sulfadiazine._ His discussion of
,'-thisAuettion, is, very competent.
�Apparently penicillin Is used Much leas frequently
.it the USSR for the treatment .of pneumonia than in
the US. 'The 'writer mentions, however, that the
production of peniciliin'it the USSR increased 500
times in comparison with 1947. Penicillin dosage
reported by thesuthorlia'the same as in the US. He
alsos4464,4hat�.tWStiviets.have durable preparations
of penicillin, namely-tovoait/oil solutions.
Recommended Treatment
- - - -
Amebiasis
Pneumonia
SECRET/SECURITY INFORMATION
50X1
50X1
50X1
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/11/04: CIA-RDP82-00047R000200810001-8
Declassified in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @ 50-Yr 2014/11/04: CIA-RDP82-00047R000200810001-8
SECRET/SECURITY INFORMATION"
-5-
12. Penicillin was treated in,a special and rather extensive chapter. Somewhat
doubtful effects were reported in the use of .penicillin for the treatment of
chronic pulmonary abscess. Good results were reported in the treatme7ntof-2--''
cholecystitis. Soviet clinicians are more cautious in regard to the results
ofspedicilain in the treatment of sepsis and sub-acute bacterial endocarditis
than their opposite numbers in the US. It may be, however, that:the dosages
used in the USSR for the treatment of these diseases are less than the dosages
used in the US. The writer reports very favorable results in the treatment
in meningitis with a combination of sulfa and penicillin.
13. Streptomycin is apparently not produced in the USSR or at least was not at
the time the book was written. The writer does, however, give some examples
of its effective use in the treatment of tuberculosis. Presumably the
streptomycin used in this treatment was imported. The writer makes some very
brief remarks on chloromycetin. Be mentions a Soviet antibiotic called
syntomycin which is effective only in the treatment of dysenteni:wefffie discovery
of aureomycin is mentioned but apparently the writer has had. very little
experience with it.
14. In conclusion it should be mentioned that in this book all appropriate and
political reliable Soviet literature, is. quoted thoroughly. Many foreign sources
were also quoted but only up to 1945s1947e �
CONCLUSION
�
15. It is very interesting that both books emphasized the experiments con-
ducted by old Russian scientists and material published in pre-revolutionary
days. It is on first examination illogical that such important discoveries
could be made at that remote time and not result in tremendous scientific
discoveries at a later date. It is, however, actually not surprising that
observations in Russia of the antipacterial effects of Mold did not result in
the discovery of penicillin. As a matter of fact, conditions of work of the
old Russian scientists were not favorable. They tad no appropriate equipment
and no encouragement. After the revolution the Communists organized manYirst-
class scientific institutes which were comparable to institutes in the US and
were probably better than most of, the Western European. Nevertheless, many
prominent scientists in the USSR did not contribute as much as might be
expected fnan their competence and working conditione. This strange discrepancy
may be explained only by the negative effect of Soviet dogma which, prevents free
creative activity and the enforced following of the scientific "party line"
described above CPart iJ. Any new discoveries, in the USSR are always .
connected with a certain amount of risk and Soviet scientists prefer to avoid
any work which might be considered controversial in order not to be accused of
sabotage.
eend--
:s 'see
SECRET/SECURITY INFORMATION
50X1
50X1
npriaccifipri in Part - Sanitized Copy Approved for Release @50-Yr 2014/11/04 : CIA-RDP82-00047R000200810001-8