Giorgio Baglivi Duro Armeno

[MosJan]

Giorgio Baglivi

 

Giorgio Baglivi (Latin: Georgius Baglivus;[a] Croatian: Gjuro Baglivi; September 8, 1668 – June 15, 1707), born Giorgio Armeno and sometimes anglicized as George Baglivi,[5] was a Croatian-Italian physician and scientist. He made important contributions to clinical education, based on his own medical practice. His De Fibra Motrice advanced the "solidist" theory that the solid parts of organs are more crucial to their good functioning than their fluids,[6] against the traditional belief in four humors. Baglivi, however, advocated against doctors relying on any general theory rather than careful observation. He was "a distinguished physiological researcher fascinated by the nerves, his microscopic studies enabled him to distinguish between smooth and striated muscles and distinct kinds of fibres."[7]

Life
Giorgio was born to Blasius Armeno and Anna de Lupis on September 8, 1668,[8] in Ragusa[1] (now Dubrovnik, Croatia). His mother was Croatian, while his father was possibly[8] of Armenian descent[1] His parents were respectable but poor merchants who both died in 1670, after the birth of Giorgio's younger brother Jacob (Latin: Jacobus).[8] The brothers were originally raised by their uncle and educated at Ragusa's Jesuit college.[8]

At 15, the brothers moved to Lecce in Apulia, where they took the name of his adoptive father, a wealthy physician[1] named Pietro Angelo Baglivi.[8] Giorgio studied first at the universities of Salerno, then successively at Padua and Bologna[5][1] and possibly also Naples.[8] He attended Lorenzo Bellini's lectures in Pisa[8] and worked in hospitals in Padua and Venice, Florence, and Bologna and travelled to the Dutch Republic and England from 1688 to 1692.[citation needed] As early as 1685, Baglivi began experimenting with animals, injecting different substances into dogs' jugular veins and examining the life cycle of tarantulas.[8] Between 1689 and 1691, he performed many autopsies and dissected animals including lions, deer, tortoises, and snakes.[8] He studied dura mater through observing injured men and experimenting on dogs and also investigated toxic drugs.[8] Observing discrepancies between his research and clinical practice, he criticized doctors for following theoretical systems slavishly instead of relying more strongly on observation. (This would later be the central theme of his 1696 book On Medical Practice.)[8]

He served as an assistant to Marcello Malpighi in Bologna in 1691, and followed him to Rome the next year when Malpighi was named chief personal physician ("archiater") to the pope.[8] Under Malpighi, Baglivi performed experiments on the circulation of blood in frogs; he also injected various medicines into dogs' veins and spinal canals and experimented on their pneumogastric nerves.[8] He utilized a microscope to study the structure of muscles and the brain.[8] Following Malpighi's death in 1694, Baglivi performed his autopsy and gave a thorough description of the cerebral apoplexy that killed him.[8] While in Rome, he befriended Bellini, Lancisi, Redi, Tozzi, and Trionfetti. In 1695, he became second physician to Pope Innocent XIII and, in 1696, was elected professor of anatomy at the College of Sapienza.[8][1] He received memberships in Rome's Academy of the Arcadians (1699) and the Tuscan Fisiocriti (1700).[8] He continued as a personal physician to Clement XI and was named the Sapienza's professor of theoretical medicine in 1701.[8] He continued his observations by microscope as professor of theoretical medicine at the Sapienza, as well as examining the properties of saliva, bile, and blood.[8] His lectures, demonstrations, and consultations became famed across Europe:[8] he was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society in England in July 1698,[9][10] a member of the Holy Roman Empire's Academy of the Curious in 1699,[8] and an "honorary member" of the French Academy.[citation needed][when?] For a time he was surrounded in controversy following charges of plagiarism by Antonio Pacchioni, but Baglivi successfully defended the primacy of his own work.[5]

He died in Rome on June 15, 1707.[8]

Works
Baglivi's writings bear strong similarities to Santorio Santorio and defend biomechanicism, making him one of the iatrophysicists.[8] Being inclined towards mathematics and quantification in medicine, Baglivi viewed the physiological processes in mechanical terms, behaving like the parts of a machine. A collection of his Latin writings were published in quarto in 1704.[1] Subsequently, his collected works were reprinted in more than 20 editions[citation needed] (including an octavo edition in 1788)[1] and were translated into Italian, French, German, and English. His personal correspondence in Latin and Italian is held at the National Central Library in Florence, Italy; the Waller Collection at the university library in Uppsala, Sweden;[8] and at McGill University's Osler Library in Montreal, Quebec, Canada.[11]

De praxi medica ad priscam observandi rationem ravocanda (Rome, 1696; trans. as The Practice of Physick at London, 1704)
De fibra motrice, et morbosa, nec non de experimentis, ac morbis salivae, bilis, et sanguinis (Perugia, 1700)
Specimen quatuor libroum de fibra motrice et morbosa (Rome, 1702)
Canones de medicina solidorum ad rectum statices usum (Rome, 1704)
Opera omnia medico-practica et anatomica (Lyons, 1704; new enlarged ed., 1710; ed. by C.G. Kuhn at Leipzig, 1827-1828)

[MosJan]

[MosJan]

Ջորջո Բալիվի (Ջիուրո Բալիվի, ծննդյան անունը՝ Ջորջո Արմենո, Գեորգ (Ջորջո, Ջուրո) Բայլիվի[3], իտալերեն՝ Giorgio Baglivi, սեպտեմբերի 8, 1668[1][2], Դուբրովնիկ, Դուբրովնիկի Հանրապետությաուն - հունիսի 15, 1707[1], Հռոմ, Պապական մարզ), հայկական արմատներով իտալացի բժիշկ, գիտնական, անատոմ, վիրաբույժ։ Բժշկագիտության դոկտոր (1686), պրոֆեսոր (1700): Բժշկական իր անձնական պրակտիկայով կարևոր ներդրում է կատարել կլինիկական բժշկության կրթության մեջ։ Առաջ է քաշել այն տեսությունը, որ մարդու օրգանների պինդ մասերը շատ ավելի կարևոր են իրենց բնականոն գործունեության համար, քան հեղուկը։

Կենսագրություն
Ջորջո Բալիվին ծնվել է 1668 թվականին Ռագուզայում (այժմ՝ Դուբրովնիկ) հայկական ծագում ունեցող Բլազուս Արմենոյի և Աննա դե Լուպիսի ընտանիքում։ Ծնողները եղել են պատկառելի, բայց աղքատ վաճառականներ։ Երկուսն էլ մահացել են 1670 թվականին՝ կրտսեր եղբոր՝ Հակոբի ծնվելուց հետո, և նրանց երկուսին էլ մեծացրել է հորեղբայրը։ 15 տարեկանում եղբոր հետ տեղափոխվել է Ապուլիայի մարզի Լեչե կոմունա, որտեղ հայտնի բժիշկ Պիետրո Անջելո Բալիվին որդեգրել է նրանց և տվել իր ազգանունը։ Ջորջիոն հաջողությամբ սովորել է Սալեռնոյի, Պադովայի, Բոլոնիայի համալսարաններում, հաճախել է իտալացի ֆիզիոլոգ, գրող Լորենցո Բելինիի դասախոսություններին, աշխատել է Պադովայի և Վենետիկի (Վենետիկի հանրապետություն) հիվանդանոցներում, Բոլոնյայում, Ֆլորենցիայում, Հոլանդական միացյալ պետությունում, Անգլիայում[4][5]։

1685 թվականի սկզբում սկսել է փորձարկումներ կատարել կենդանիների վրա՝ շների լծային արյունադարձ երակներում ներարկելով տարբեր նյութեր և ուսումնասիրել է մորմերի կյանքի ցիկլերը։ 1689-1691 թվականներին դիահերձել է կենդանիների՝ այդ թվում առյուծների, եղջերուների, կրիաների, օձերի։

1691 թվականից եղել է Մարչելլո Մալպիգիի օգնականը, սկսած Բոլոնիայից նրան հետևել է Հռոմում, երբ Մալպիգին եղել է Պապի անձնական գլխավոր բժիշկը։ Մալպիգիի հետ աշխատելու տարիներին Ջորջիոն գորտերի վրա արյան շրջանառության փորձեր է կատարել, ներարկումներ է կատարել շների երակներում և ողնաշարային փողերում՝ կատարելով շարժվող նյարդի փորձարկումներ։ Օգտագործել է մանրադիտակ՝ ուսումնասիրելու մկանների և ուղեղի կառուցվածքը։

1692 թվականին հաստատվել է Հռոմում, «Սապիենցա» ակադեմիայում դասավանդել անատոմիա և վիրաբուժություն, 1701 թվականից՝ տեսական բժշկության ամբիոնի վարիչ։ Հռոմի Ինոկենտիոս XII պապի, այնուհետև Կղեմես XI պապի անձնական բժիշկն էր։ Հռչակվել է որպես «բժշկության բարեփոխիչ», «հռոմեական Հիպոկրատ»։ Հայտնի են Բայլիվիի «Գործնական բժշկության մասին» (1696, լատիներեն) և «Բանախոսություններ» (1700, լատիներեն) աշխատությունները, որոնցում շոշափվում են տեսական բժշկության հարցեր[3]։

1694 թվականին Մալպիգիի մահից հետո դիահերձել է նրան և տվել նրան սպանած ուղեղային կաթվածի մանրակրկիտ նկարագրությունը։ Հռոմում անցկացրած տարիներին ընկերացել է Լորենցո Բելինիի, Ջիովանի Մարիա Լանցիսի, Ֆրանչեսկո Ռեդիի, Տոցցիի և Տրիոնֆետիի հետ։ 1695 թվականին դարձել է Հռոմի Իննոկենտ XIII պապի երկրորդ բժիշկը, 1696 թվականին ընտրվել է Լա Սապիենցա քոլեջի անատոմիայի պրոֆեսոր։ 1699 թվականից անդամակցել է Հռոմի Արկադյան ակադեմիային, 1700 թվականից՝ Տոսկանիայի մեծ դքսության Fisiocritici-ի անդամ։

Բայլիվին[3] ուսումնասիրել է մկանային հյուսվածքի կառուցվածքն ու ֆունկցիան (առաջինն է մկանները դասակարգել երկու հիմնական տեսակի՝ հարթ և միջաձիգ զոլավոր), ինչպես նաև Իտալիայի հանքային ջրերի բուժիչ հատկությունները։ Տատրոմեխանիստական ուսմունքի կողմնակից էր. ֆիզիոլոգիայում և ախտաբանության մեջ կարևոր նշանակություն է տվել ոսկրային հյուսվածքի ամրությանը[3]։

Մահ
Մահացել է Հռոմում,1707 թվականի հունիսի 15-ին։

Անդամակցություն
«Սապիենցա» և գերմանական բնախույզների «Լեոպոլդինա» ակադեմիաների, Բժիշկների թագավորական և մի շարք այլ բժշկական ընկերությունների անդամ էր։
Աշխատություններ
Ջորջո Բալիվիի աշխատությունների ժողովածուն, բոլորը լատիներեն, հրատարակվել են 1704 թվականին, նույն տեսքով մի քանի անգամ արտատպվել է։

A. Toscano, Catalogo delle Carte di Giorgio Baglivi conservate nella Waller Samling presso Universitetsbiblioteket «Carolina Rediviva» di Uppsala, in “NUNCIUS”, a. IX (1994), fasc. 2, pp. 683–738
A. Toscano (ed.), G. Baglivi Carteggio (1679-1704). Conservato nella Waller Collection presso la University Library «Carolina Rediviva» di Uppsala, "Archivio della Corrispondenza degli Scienziati Italiani", 14, Firenze, Leo S. Olschki, 1999
A. Toscano, Mirabilis Machina. Il “perpetuum mobile” attraverso il ‘De statice aeris’ e il ‘De fibra motrice et morbosa’ di Giorgio Baglivi, Cosenza, Edizioni Brenner, 2004
A. Toscano, Giorgio Baglivi e la Comunità scientifica europea tra razionalismo e illuminismo, in Atti del Convegno: Alle origini della biologia medica. Giorgio Baglivi tra le due sponde dell’Adriatico, in “Medicina nei secoli”, n.s., vol. 12, n. 1 (2000), p. 49-79
A.Toscano, ‘Il Movimento agente universale’. Il moto armonico del cosmo e la macchina dei fenomeni vitali: Giorgio Baglivi ed il ‘De statice aeris’ , © Anna Toscano-www.storiadellascienza.it, 2008, [1] Archived 2011-01-26 at the Wayback Machine.
Mihalić Neva G (2009)։ «Re-evaluation of the epistemic foundation of Baglivi's medical doctrine and his anatomico-physiological theory»։ Lijecnicki vjesnik (Croatia) 131 (1-2): 34–9; discussion 40–1։ ISSN 0024-3477։ PMID 19348355
Opera omnia medico-practica et anatomica, Lugduni, 1704.

 

https://hy.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D5%8B%D5%B8%D6%80%D5%BB%D5%B8_%D4%B2%D5%A1%D5%AC%D5%AB%D5%BE%D5%AB

 

[MosJan]

Giorgio Baglivi and The Practice of Physick

 

 

“To form a right Judgment of Diseases, is a very difficult Matter.” With this opening sentence, Giorgio Baglivi (Figure 1) began his 1696 treatise De Praxi Medica, which was translated in 1704 as The Practice of Physick (Figure 2).1 Throughout the treatise, he frames the problems plaguing late seventeenth and early eighteenth-century medicine and proposes their solutions.

Baglivi was born in Croatia on 8 September 1668 as Duro Armeno but was orphaned two years later and raised by an uncle.2 At age fifteen, he was adopted by Pietro Angelo Baglivi, a prominent physician in Lecce, Italy, and given the name Giorgio Baglivi. He was apprenticed to his adoptive father and studied medicine at Naples. In 1691 he moved to Bologna and studied with Marcello Malpighi, eventually becoming Malpighi’s assistant and following him to Rome the next year. In 1696 Baglivi was appointed professor of medicine and anatomy at the Sapienza University of Rome and published De Praxi Medica. He died from malaria in Rome on 15 June 1707 at age thirty-eight.

Baglivi’s aim in The Practice of Physick is stipulated in the book’s subtitle: “Reduc’d to the Ancient Way of Observations: Containing a Just Parallel between the Wisdom and Experience of the Ancients, and the Hypothesis’s of Modern Physicians.” He wanted to embed the theoretical medicine of his day on a foundation of ancient practical medicine, especially the teachings of the Greeks and Hippocrates. Baglivi credited the “Prince of Physicians” for transforming medicine from a discipline founded on opinion and superstition to one based on observation and reason—the two chief pillars for the practice of medicine. But later physicians, especially those from Arabia, separated these pillars into two distinct sects. The first was the “Empirick Sect, which exploding all Theory, and disclaiming all manner of Reasoning . . . trusted to Experience alone in the Cure of Diseases.”3 The second was the “Sect of Rational Physicians,” who, Baglivi claimed, gave “the greatest deference . . . to Reason; partly, because they were afraid of stumbling on the Errors they had charg’d upon the Empiricks.”4 Hence a crisis in medicine arose in which it became “despised in many places,” as he admitted in the preface.

To resolve the crisis and to regain medicine’s once ennobled status, Baglivi endeavored to reposition medicine once again squarely on its two pillars, observation and reason. To that end, he chided the two sects accordingly:

 

 

Those who oppose Reason to Experience, whether Empiricks or Rational Physicians, seem to me to be all Mad: For how can we make Reason to act all the Parts of Science, that, as all wise Men ought to acknowledge, is acquir’d by Tryal and Use continu’d thro’ a long progress of Time? And on the other hand, why should Experience be only regarded, and Reason turn’d out of doors? . . . I understand that Queen Reason, that is plac’d above all the rest, by which a Physician looks into the Principles and Causes of Diseases, foretells their progress.5

For Baglivi, both reason and experience or observation were critical for the robust practice of medicine. But the issue arose as to how best to combine them to benefit one another mutually, and Baglivi proposed two ways of doing this.

The first way was to yoke reason to observation. “Observation is the Thread,” he wrote, “to which Reason must point.”6 In other words, reason must be guided or directed by observation or experience. Baglivi’s fear was that the rational physician might not accurately perceive the cause of a patient’s illness unless symptoms were observed at “the sick Man’s Bed.”7 He went on to note that “the Narratives of sick people” are equally critical for practicing attentive medicine. Baglivi named this thorough observation of the patient, which harkened back to Hippocratic medicine, Medicina Prima.

The second way was to yoke experience or observation to reason. “Experience,” noted Baglivi, “likewise unconducted by Reason is often-times fallacious.”8 Experience or observation, unless subjected to critical reason, can be misconstrued or misinterpreted. Baglivi’s fear was that without critical reasoning, an empirical physician might misjudge a patient’s symptoms and make a faulty clinical judgment. For Baglivi, reason involved the theoretical, especially new theories associated with the iatromechanical and iatrochemical schools.9 He named this medicine, which is dependent on science, Medicina Secunda. Thus, the genuine medical practitioner first makes a thorough examination of the patient, gathering sufficient information, and then renders an accurate diagnosis and prescribes an effective therapeutic plan based on the best current medical theories.

 

Baglivi identified four steps required to practice medicine effectively vis-à-vis Medicina Prima and Secunda. The first involves making accurate observations of symptoms and chronicling the patient’s narrative, but also noting the season, location, and therapeutic outcomes. The physician is to proceed as “a faithful Scribe” and not to embellish observations with personal opinion, speculation, or vain erudition. The next step is to categorize observations with respect to diagnosis, prognosis, cause, and therapeutic outcomes, among other categories. “Observations are like the Letters of the Alphabet, useless indeed in themselves; but when variously joyn’d, mutually collated and rang’d in order,” according to Baglivi, “they make up the true Idiom of Nature.”10 Once clinical observations are assembled, the third step is what he called “the Method of Digestion,” in which the physician cogitates the intelligibility of various observations. And in the final step, the physician makes a judgment concerning appropriate “general Precepts, comprehending the sum and quintessence of the Art.”11

These general precepts are the aphorisms that serve as guideposts for directing the physician in “true Practice.”12 An important criterion for the aphorisms is that they must be “commensurable” to the particular observations upon which they were formulated: “We must take care above all, that the Mind be directed by Prudence to have the Particulars always in view, and not be left to itself, as being apt in its own Nature to soar to abstracted things.”13 This guided Hippocrates, he claimed, and so must also guide physicians throughout the ages. Baglivi’s practice of medicine, then, was initiated through observations made while attending to and treating the patient, i.e., Medicina Prima (Figure 3). Those observations are the primary support, in conjunction with critical reasoning, that ground the physician’s use of current medical theory to treat the patient, i.e., Medicina Secunda (Figure 3). But Baglivi insisted that the entire process of medical practice—De Praxi Medica—must be prudent in the sense that the physician always focuses diligently on the patient and strives to practice medicine upon both observation and reason for the patient’s benefit.

Baglivi’s practice is relevant for today’s data-driven medicine. Assembling large data-sets of patients and populations enable healthcare professionals to model disease processes and discover novel therapeutics without engaging in traditional hypothesis-driven science. “Data-driven medicine,” argue proponents, “will enable the discovery of new treatment options based on the multi-model molecular measurements on patients and learning from the trends hidden among the diagnoses, prescriptions, and discharge summaries of millions of patient encounters logged by clinical practitioners.”14 Although much progress has been made towards realizing this promise, challenges still remain.15 One challenge is applying such large data-sets effectively to both patients and populations. “For all the talk about the growing mountains of health data,” reports Éanna Kelly, “public health specialists say they are hardly any wiser about how they can apply it to improve overall population health.”16 Baglivi’s advice for this challenge would be to

engage in data collection through the “light” of a rational method.17 In other words, reason and observation together are the foundations or pillars for advancing medical knowledge and its practice.

 

 

https://hekint.org/2021/02/16/giorgio-baglivi-and-the-practice-of-physick/