Myths of the Eastern Front

that's your opinion

 

If the dysentery cases increased because of the winter,it would be known and (reliable) figures would be available: they are not available .

And the German generals would have used these figures as an excuse for their defeat .

Noone knows how many dysentery cases occured between 22 june and 1 december 1941,nor between 1 december 1941 and 1 april 1942,thus the attempts to use dysentery to excuse the German defeat on the eastern front is doomed to fail .

 

No, it's medical facts...




And you really need to come to grips with the Quote button...

 

Strawman.

 

The Russians had aready lived through the dysentery and hepatitis. No problem for them for getting a second infection. Even with bad water.

 

LJAD you said they didn't go indoors

 

[SIZE=10.5pt]Of course, the Germans went indoors. As the Germans came to the Russian villages and cities they dislodged children, women and elderly people from their homes, stolen their warm clothes and let them die outside.[/SIZE]

 

I did not : I said that the Ostheer was not indoors in the winter ,which is not the same .

And,being indoors does not cause dysentery, it CAN increase the contamination of dysentery,but,this is not provable,not measurable .

Has anyone informations that indicate that the Russian civilians who were indoors during a great part of the winter suffered more from dysentery in the winter than during the other seasons when they were more outdoors ?

Thus,why would the Germans suffer more from dysentery in the winter than in the other seasons ?

 

And the Red Army ? Did they also suffer from dysentery in the winter? More than the Germans ? Less than the Germans? Less than in the other seasons ? More ?

Discussing dysentery cases on the German side only is the same as the usual discussion of how cold it was on the German side and "forgetting" that it was also cold on the Soviet side .

 

Ljad:
Has anyone informations that indicate that the Russian civilians who were indoors during a great part of the winter suffered more from dysentery in the winter than during the other seasons when they were more outdoors ?

Thus,why would the Germans suffer more from dysentery in the winter than in the other seasons ?

My answer:


Remember that the locals had already had a number of infections anyway either hepatitis or dysentery so they were more or less immune to diseases. Not the cold though. For Germans this was the first infection and could lead to death or long period of getting better. You should know.

 

1) It is questionable that the locals were more or less immune to diseases: during WWII thousands of locals in Belgian Congo died from dysentery:thus if the locals in Congo were not immune,why would the locals in Russia be immune ?

2) It is questionable that for the Germans this was their first infection : there were already dysentery cases in Poland in september 1939.

3) The Germans had experience from dysentery (as had the other nations) : in WWI 155000 German soldiers suffered from dysentery and 8600 died.Following" viruses versus superbugs" (P 107),one can deduce from divisional reports (in sofar as they are reliable) that in 1941 6/10 % of the German soldiers in the SU suffered from dysentery .
But :casualties are not mentioned,neither the geographical areas (although the Ukraine and Crimea are obviuous candidates) ,monthly figures are also not available .

If the % of 6 or 10 is reliable,what would be the impact of the dysentery ?

Probably not high : in WWI the casualties were less than 6 % and after WWI a new drug was invented olyfagin .In "Va-Banque" Schustereit is mentioning 2 epidemics of dysentery who passed away quicly

4) It is not so that dysentery was limited to Eastern Europe: in june 1917 in Prussia 92 people died from dysentery, in july 368, in august 1581,in september 2712.

Even today there are in Belgium yearly 300 cases of dysentery .

 

This is absolutely false. Dysentery is caused by many various microorganisms including: viruses, bacteria and protozoa *. How on Earth can someone confer immunity to such a wide spectra of different microbial species?

A statement that the Russians were immune to the contagious diseases is ordinary prejudice.

I have more reliable explanation for the increased occurrence of dysentery at the Eastern front: the Germans have created conditions for dysentery by depriving civilians from basic goods: facilities for proper sanitation, healthy food, and fresh water. Under such conditions even hygiene maniac may be infected. Pedantic fieldmarshal Paulus suffered from dysentery in Stalingrad as well as his boss – Hitler, one year before.

As usual, the Germans reaped what they sow.

PS: You should know

-------------------------
* Similarly, hepatitis has different causes, not a single microorganism causes it.

 

There is a story for example of "Doctor and dysentery" which I cannot for some reason now get here. You can try to find it with the mentioned part. The last part was that the locals in Mexico were yes carriers of amoeba but did not have any symptoms as well as his wife was asymptomless, but he himself had the worst kinda life for the fifth time. To me it seems the infection is subclinical in locals but if foreigner you are bound to get the disease at least 50% with massive symptoms again and again. The locals had none.

 

To avoid elaborate discussion about medicine with a nurse (nurses always know better than the doctors, don't they?) , I will simply make a reference to the medical dictionary:

[SIZE=10pt]The[/SIZE] [SIZE=10pt]disease[/SIZE] [SIZE=10pt]agents[/SIZE] [SIZE=10pt]that[/SIZE] [SIZE=10pt]cause[/SIZE] [SIZE=10pt]dysentery[/SIZE] [SIZE=10pt]do not confer[/SIZE] immunity against reinfection at a later date.

[SIZE=10pt]I guess that this statement is quite clear and undeniable. “General immunity” you’ve mentioned is just a phenomena that healthy people, well fed and in good living conditions are less susceptible to diseases though they do not actually possess immunity in its real sense. On the other hand some people develop immunity for certain diseases even without being aware that they have ever been infected. Symptoms of hepatitis A, for example, sometimes resemble ordinary flu. Just blood [/SIZE]analysis [SIZE=10pt]afterwards indicates the presence of anti-bodies[/SIZE]

 

Very interesting. Perhaps another thread for this:
Knew that after a cold/flu/ chicken pox etc, the body builds immunity...
Didn't the common cold kill a lot of Eskimos when first encountered?...That the Eskimos who lived in freezing environments, had never had a cold before- indicates that cold weather does not induce a cold virus...there must be other contributors, such as malnutrition/ lack of sleep/ stress, and the introduction of the rhinovirus.
Where did rhinovirus originate, if not in a cold climate.
And is it possible to build resistance to food poisoning? ..People build immunity to snake bites, bee stings, so maybe.

 

I am not surprised about the cases of dysentery in Belgium today. For a Western country their standards of hygiene are appalling .

 

My understanding was though that some of them are close enough to each other that getting one could result in you haveing partial or even total immunity to the other. If you "get" a disease but are asymptomatic is that considered to be "immune"? A healthy person may get such a disease and essentially have no symptoms but the same person under significant stress or other factors that negativly impact the immune system may develope significant or severe symptoms.

It is clear. I don't see that it is undeniable. Then of course even if they don't confir immunity vs reinfection some resistance to the symptoms may be confirred. I would like to see the documentation for the above though.