식민지 조선의 전염병예방령 개정과 ‘보균자’ 문제

백선례(Baek, Seon-Lye) 의료역사연구회 2021 의료사회사연구 Vol.7 No.1

1910년 병합 이후 조선총독부는 식민지 조선 통치의 기반이 되는 다양한 법령들을 차례로 공포하였으며, 위생행정과 관련된 법령들 역시 1910년대에 차례대로 제정되었다. 1915년 6월 제령 제2호로 전염병예방령이 제정되었고, 이로써 조선총독부 통치 초기의 위생 관련 법령이 정비되었다. 1915년 전염병예방령 제정이 지니는 의미와 그 제정과정, 그리고 그 성격에 대해서는 상당한 분석이 이루어졌지만, 이후 1920년대 전염병예방령이 개정된 것에 주목한 연구는 찾아보기 힘들다. 이 글에서는 1920년대 조선의 전염병예방령 개정에 주목하여 그 의미와 시행과정을 살펴보고자 한다. 이 전염병예방령 개정이 의미 있는 것 중의 하나는 ‘보균자’라는 의학지식이 법령이 반영되어 보균자 단속을 강조했다는 점에서이다. 20세기 초 새롭게 알려진 건강보균자에 대한 지식과 함께 보균자가 전염병 방역의 중요한 존재로 떠오르면서 보균자 취급 문제가 법령에 반영되었던 것이다. 조선에서는 1924년 6월 전염병예방령 개정이 관보를 통해 고시되었으나 실제 시행기일은 1928년 6월 1일로 시행까지 4년여의 시간이 소요되었다. 4년의 기간에 걸쳐 개정된 전염병예방령 및 시행규칙에서 가장 중요하게 강조되었던 부분은 역시 ‘보균자’ 단속의 강화였다. 이렇게 법령으로 보균자 취급이 강화된 만큼 언론에서 그려내는 보균자 묘사 또한 강화되었다. 언론을 통해 일반 대중들에게 보균자의 위험성을 강조하는 것은 보균자 검사를 위한 시설 및 인력이 부족한 상황에서 개인의 자발적 검사에 기댈 수밖에 없었던 식민지 조선의 상황이 반영된 것이기도 하였다. The typhoid outbreak that occurred in New York in the early 1900s and the case of Typhoid Mary, who was identified as the cause of the outbreak and sent a wave of the infection throughout the United States, established the existence of disease carriers. In addition, this also highlighted the importance of the identification of carriers in infectious disease prevention. In order to apply this new finding to quarantine strategies for infectious disease control, regulations had to be put in place. Accordingly, in the 1910s, a category of ‘carrier(s)’ was added to the revised Infectious Disease Prevention Order in Taiwan and Korea. In the Japanese Empire, a 1922 revision of the Infectious Disease Control and Prevention Act considered carriers as infected patients, recommending the same set of rules for both carriers and patients. After the revision of the Act in Japan, revisions to the Infectious Disease Prevention Order in Taiwan and Korea followed. In December 1925, the Infectious Disease Prevention Order was abolished in Taiwan, to follow the Infectious Disease Control and Prevention Act of Japan. Although a revision of the Infectious Disease Prevention Order was announced through the official gazette in June 1924 in Korea, the revision did not actually take place until 4 years later, on June 1, 1928. The most emphasized topic within the 4-year revision of the Infectious Disease Prevention Order and the Enforcement Decree of the Infectious Disease Prevention Order also pertained to carriers. In fact, until the 1910s, Koreans were viewed as potential carriers. However, overtime, greater importance was placed on the role of carriers in infectious disease prevention, which thus emerged as an urgent issue. The existence of carriers in Colonial Korea was identified during the cholera outbreak in 1920, following an incident involving the accommodation of carriers in a hospital (Sunhwawon). The incident led to attempts to educate the public through newspaper and magazine articles on the existence of carriers and the need to quarantine. During the revision of the Infectious Disease Prevention Order, awareness regarding disease carriers was enforced due to a typhoid fever outbreak in Gyeonseong in January and February, 1928. Furthermore, attempts to increase the understanding about carriers were continued in the press, albeit in such a way that labeled carriers as the source of infectious disease and emphasized their risk to others. As a result, expressions used to describe carriers were becoming increasingly unsavory, such as the “troops of infectious diseases” and “spies”. Medical information regarding carriers was included in the newly revised Infectious Disease Prevention Order and disseminated through newspaper and magazine articles with the purpose of promoting understanding with the aim of creating awareness about the need to investigate and quarantine carriers. Nevertheless, carriers continued to be framed as the major source of infectious diseases as a means to improve the public’s understanding of their role in disease transmission.

1919ㆍ20년 식민지 조선의 콜레라 방역활동

백선례(Baek. Seon-Lye) 한국사학회 2011 史學硏究 Vol.- No.101

This study focuses on how preventive measures against cholera epidemic by the authorities was conducted and examines how Koreans reacted to them. My aim is to expose various features found between the colonizer and the colonized. Cholera, which had spread to Chos?n, infected 16,915 people (the deads 11,533) in 1919, 24,229 people (the deads 13,568) in 1920. When cholera broke out near the Chos?n, the authorities started all sort of quarantine. After cholera was brought into the Chos?n, the authorities made the greater efforts to search for cases of infectious disease. And Preventive injections against cholera were enforced in all parts of Chos?n. People were imposed of constraints by the quarantine. People was not able to move freely in and out of country. Several limits and controls were followed in the place where cases were found, and it infiltrated deep into there every day life. The majority of Koreans had fully depended on existing norms and old customs about infectious disease. It made Koreans to conflict frequently with the authorities. As a result, the policemen’s attitude was increasingly heavy-handed, and Koreans resisted it. Most of Koreans were reluctant to be hospitalized in the isolation hospitals because of the poor medical treatment, and tried to build their own isolation hospitals. And the local notables and youths organized prevention of epidemic associations. They were welcomed by local people and met with better results more than the authorities. Cholera was a terror and a common enemy to both Korean and Japanese. Therefore, everyone who lived in Chos?n had the same purpose, the eradication of cholera. The authorities suffered frequent conflicts with Koreans, although they started all sort of preventive measures against cholera. On the one hand Koreans struggled against the prevention of epidemics by the authorities, they tried to organize their own associations, and establish the private isolation hospitals, on the other hand. Preventive measures against cholera by the authorities and Korean’s reactions in 1919 and 1920 showed that the authorities and people affected each other. This point exposed the other side of colonial rule that was difficult to explain through one-sided rule by the colonizer and resistance or adaptation by the colonized.

일제 식민지시기 산불대책

백선례(Baek, Seon-lye) 한국역사연구회 2017 역사와 현실 Vol.- No.103

Studies of the Colonial authorities’ forest policy, during the Japanese occupation period, have so far concentrated upon examining how the forest resources were managed and exploited. As it was important for the authorities to survey the overall size of Joseon forests (and who owned them as well) in order to manage and monitor forest resources efficiently and effectively, colonial authorities launched certain projects in such vein, and those projects have been well studied by today’s researchers. Yet how the authorities were endowed with such power over forests, as well as the right to manage forests in the first place, was somewhat absent from previous studies. With the intention to compensate for such absence, the issue of forest protection will be examined in this article, in terms of the authorities’ supposed plans for fire fighting, which the colonial authorities claimed as stemming from their will to protect and preserve forests. By doing so we may see how the issue of forest fires entered the realm of state management to begin with. Of course, forest fires were initially never the priority of concern for colonial authorities, as earlier they had no reason to deem the issue either worthy or necessary. It was only natural for them to turn their attention to such issue (forest fires) in times when the Bukseon reclamation project was launched and wartime mobilization was firing up full scale. The authorities had to monitor all those forest fires because they needed all the woods they could get, and that was how forest fires entered their range of interests. With a systemic preservation policy in place, at least some of the forest fires may have been prevented. But the effect such policy ultimately had upon the forests in general should be assessed from a more balanced point of view, as such policy was intent upon utilizing all the forest resources, just as much as it was claimed to be interested in preserving them. In that regard, forest fires should be considered as a topic that could reveal both the effects and shortcomings of the colonial authorities’ intentions and efforts.

식민지 시기 장티푸스예방접종에 관한 의학적 논의의 전개

백선례 ( Baek Seon-lye ) 연세대학교 의과대학 의사학과 의학사연구소 2020 연세의사학 Vol.23 No.2

This article examines how professional discussions on the typhoid vaccine, the latest medical technology during the Japanese Colonial Period, evolved in colonial Korea (Joseon), focusing on articles published in Japanese and Joseon medical journals at the time. I attempt to describe vaccination not as “complete knowledge,” but as knowledge that was being constructed, as well as compare the knowledge construction process between the Japanese Empire and Joseon. In Imperial Japan, there were various studies on typhoid vaccination. Generally, most of them agreed on the vaccine’s effectiveness, but other opinions also appeared. Certain studies mentioned that it was difficult to consider the reduction of typhoid incidences in the Japanese Army and Navy an effect of the vaccine. Moreover, some suggested that more attention should be paid to oral immunity, as vaccination was difficult to popularize, and incomplete vaccination was no different than not getting vaccinated at all. In addition, Japanese researchers conducted studies with variabilities in vaccination methods and amounts that assessed post-vaccination morbidity and mortality to improve the vaccine’s effectiveness. Contrarily, Joseon’s medical journals primarily communicated observational statistics from clinical studies that mainly involved Japanese participants, focused on post-vaccination reactogenicity, and conveyed potential opportunities for oral immunity that had less reactogenicity. While the Japanese and Joseon medical journals were similar in that they both acknowledged the typhoid vaccine’s effectiveness and how to improve it, their directions were quite different. In Japan, as vaccinations were implemented on a large scale and statistical data regularly accumulated, the studies mainly strove to reduce the number of deaths after vaccination. Meanwhile, the Joseon medical journals included studies on lowering post-vaccination reactogenicity in an attempt to increase the number of vaccinations, as resistance to vaccinations remained strong among Koreans. In summary, the contents of the Japanese and Joseon discussions regarding typhoid vaccination were different and limited based on their location, even though these studies were conducted in the same time period. Such differences demonstrate the impact of the colonial situation, which was evident even in medical journals limited to a small number of readers and in a field of knowledge that was distant from the public. Even so, both Japanese and Joseon medical journals shared similar relative and hierarchical methods in hygiene ideology. In addition, this study defends the view that although preventive medicine, such as vaccination, is a field closely related to policy, it cannot exist as a “field of objective knowledge” independent from social and political contexts.