Editing Neisseria gonorrhoeae (section)

== History ==

=== Name origin ===
''Neisseria gonorrhoeae'' is named for Albert Neisser, who isolated it as the causative agent of the disease gonorrhea in 1878.<ref name="Quillin_2018"/><ref name="O'Donnell_2009" /> Galen (130 AD) coined the term "gonorrhea" from the Greek ''gonos'' which means "seed" and ''rhoe'' which means "flow".<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.etymonline.com/word/gonorrhea|title=gonorrhea {{!}} Origin and meaning of gonorrhea by Online Etymology Dictionary|website=www.etymonline.com|language=en|access-date=2017-12-05}}</ref><ref name="Hill_2016"/> Thus, gonorrhea means "flow of seed", a description referring to the white penile discharge, assumed to be semen, seen in male infection.<ref name="Quillin_2018" />

=== Discovery ===
In 1878, Albert Neisser isolated and visualized ''N. gonorrhoeae'' diplococci in samples of pus from 35 men and women with the classic symptoms of genitourinary infection with gonorrhea – two of whom also had infections of the eyes.<ref name="Hill_2016" /> In 1882, Leistikow and Loeffler were able to grow the organism in culture.<ref name="Quillin_2018" /> Then in 1883, Max Bockhart proved conclusively that the bacterium isolated by Albert Neisser was the causative agent of the disease known as gonorrhea by inoculating the penis of a healthy man with the bacteria.<ref name="Hill_2016" /> The man developed the classic symptoms of gonorrhea days after, satisfying the last of [[Koch's postulates]]. Until this point, researchers debated whether syphilis and gonorrhea were manifestations of the same disease or two distinct entities.<ref name="Singal">{{cite book | vauthors = Singal A, Grover C |title=Comprehensive Approach to Infections in Dermatology |date=2016 |publisher=JP Medical |isbn=978-93-5152-748-0 |page=470 }}</ref><ref name="Hill_2016" /> One such 18th-century researcher, John Hunter, tried to settle the debate in 1767<ref name="Hill_2016" /> by inoculating a man with pus taken from a patient with gonorrhea. He erroneously concluded that syphilis and gonorrhea were indeed the same disease when the man developed the copper-colored rash that is classic for syphilis.<ref name="Janeway Jr_2001"/><ref name="Singal"/> Although many sources repeat that Hunter inoculated himself,<ref name="Janeway Jr_2001" /><ref name="Quillin_2018" /> others have argued that it was in fact another man.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Gladstein J | title = Hunter's chancre: did the surgeon give himself syphilis? | journal = Clinical Infectious Diseases | volume = 41 | issue = 1 | pages = 128; author reply 128-128; author reply 129 | date = July 2005 | pmid = 15937780 | doi = 10.1086/430834 | doi-access = free }}</ref> After Hunter's experiment other scientists sought to disprove his conclusions by inoculating other male physicians, medical students,<ref name="Quillin_2018" /> and incarcerated men with gonorrheal pus, who all developed the burning and discharge of gonorrhea. One researcher, Ricord, took the initiative to perform 667 inoculations of gonorrheal pus on patients of a mental hospital, with zero cases of syphilis.<ref name="Hill_2016" /><ref name="Quillin_2018" /> Notably, the advent of penicillin in the 1940s made effective treatments for gonorrhea available.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Jose |first1=Predesh Parasseril |last2=Vivekanandan |first2=Vatsan |last3=Sobhanakumari |first3=Kunjumani |title=Gonorrhea: Historical outlook |journal=Journal of Skin and Sexually Transmitted Diseases |date=15 October 2020 |volume=2 |pages=110–114 |doi=10.25259/JSSTD_4_2020 |doi-access=free }}</ref>