Postwar Confusion: What to Do Next?

Abstract

Abstract With World War II drawing to a close, many in the Health Division assumed the organization would quickly slip back into its old grooves. As Hackett noted in his History, however, “finding its proper role in the postwar world was to prove a more difficult and revolutionary transformation than the adjustment to war.” Those who hoped for continuity felt reassured when George Strode, an associate director for many years, succeeded Sawyer as director of the Health Division in the spring of 1944. His appointment was especially welcomed by the field workers, whose morale had suffered under Russell and Sawyer. Strode, who was more of an administrator than a scientist, was seen by this group as a Rose man who would restore the balance between public health in the field and research in the laboratory. But if the field officers were expecting any significant changes they were to be disappointed. “I believe,” Strode wrote, “we shall wish to continue the study of specific diseases and I would expect no immediate additions to or subtractions from the present list.” As a result, the Health Division tried to proceed much as before, and the budget allocations during the Strode years were not radically different from those of Sawyer’s. Money spent on specific diseases continued to slide, and, surprisingly, the money allocated to laboratory research increased from 7% under Sawyer, the laboratory man, to 10% under Strode (Table 1.2).