{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026143790849673203, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011437908496732025, 'mean_word_length': 5.064356435643564, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Harvard-MIT Division of Health Sciences and Technology: The First 25 Years, 1970-1995 (review)

century. During the Cold War, tropical public health initiatives received considerable support from the U.S. government and private patrons—yet by the early 1980s, American tropical medicine had but a marginal place in medical curricula and governmental funding. Unfortunately, Weller offers few explanations for this decline. He does argue, however, that this shift in priorities has had implications for the capacity of the United States to respond to emerging infectious diseases. He ends on a cautionary note: he pleads for a return to the basic principles of tropical medicine that he sought to create at Harvard, which combine an approach to disease in ecological terms with programs aimed at Third World development. These are laudable goals. Autobiographies of eminent scientists tend to make for poor history. Weller’s story is often anecdotal and episodic. Still, it represents a significant resource for two of the most important areas of postwar biomedicine—virology and international health. Historians of medicine have yet to fully mine these areas. When they do, Weller’s text will be a useful primary source.