The interaction of scientific evidence and politics in debates about preventing malaria in 1925

Malaria parasites were identified by Laveran in Algeria in 1883, their cycle largely elucidated by Ross in India in 1895 and transmission of malaria by Anopheles was identified by Grassi in Italy in 1899.1–3 Very soon after the transmission of malaria had been elucidated, the first science-based approaches to preventing the disease were designed and implemented by Celli in Italy.4,5 Italy had had a tradition of draining marshes going back to Etruscan times. In 1883, this strategy was officially implemented by an Italian Royal law and named Bonifica. Because of the role of water in the breeding of Anopheles, Bonifica was not unnaturally assumed to be a way of controlling malaria. Although anti-malaria prophylaxis based on intervening in the biology of Anopheles or on extensive land drainage could be seen as complementary procedures, they were curiously seen to be in opposition. The efficacy of Bonifica as an anti-malaria measure was challenged by experts in malaria prophylaxis and epidemiology. However, in 1925 the Italian government chose to favour Bonifica, and this shaped Italian anti-malaria campaigns for the next 15 years. In selecting Bonifica as the ‘official’ Italian policy of malaria prophylaxis, conflicts within the fascist movement6 played a more significant role than that of science and medicine.