Level:
Correct: 0
Incorrect: 0
Marks: 0/0
Exam Practice
Subject:
Topics:
Avg
score:
–
Topics
done:
0/12

Modern treatment of disease

Practise 34 exam-style questions on Modern treatment of disease for AQA GCSE History (Health and the people). Write your answer as you would in the exam and get it marked in seconds against the mark scheme, point by point, with an AI tutor on hand if you get stuck.

  • 34 questions
  • 1–20 marks each
  • Instant marking
  • No sign-up needed
20 questions, marked as you go

Sample questions with model answers

Here are 4 of the questions in this topic, each with a model answer, an explanation of why it earns the marks and the mark scheme an examiner would use.

Question 1

2 marks

Give two ways in which the treatment of HIV/AIDS in Britain changed between the 1980s and the 2010s.

Model answer

In the 1980s there was no effective treatment; the first drug, AZT, approved in 1987, had only a limited effect. From 1996 combination antiretroviral therapy controlled the virus, so by the 2010s HIV had become a long-term, manageable condition and people on treatment could expect a near-normal life.

Explanation

AIDS was first identified in 1981 and was almost always fatal in the 1980s. Combination therapy from 1996 transformed it, an example of how new diseases have been met with new treatments developed by the pharmaceutical industry.

Mark scheme
  1. 1 mark

    In the 1980s there was no effective treatment: the first drug, AZT (1987), had only a limited effect and serious side effects; from 1996 combination antiretroviral therapy (several drugs taken together) controlled the virus.

    One mark per valid change, max 2. Accept: AZT was replaced by combinations of drugs / antiretroviral drugs.

  2. 1 mark

    HIV changed from a fatal disease into a long-term manageable condition: people on treatment can expect a near-normal life expectancy.

    Accept: people no longer die of AIDS if treated.

  3. 1 mark

    New ways of preventing infection: effective treatment makes the virus undetectable so it cannot be passed on, and PrEP (a drug taken to prevent infection) became available on the NHS.

    Accept also: much easier and quicker testing (including home testing). Max 2 marks in total.

Question 2

8 marks

Explain the significance of Alexander Fleming's discovery of penicillin in 1928.

Model answer

At the time, Fleming's discovery had very little significance. In September 1928, at St Mary's Hospital in London, he noticed that a mould had contaminated a plate of staphylococcus bacteria and killed those around it. He grew the mould, named the substance penicillin and published his findings in 1929. However, he could not purify it or make enough of it, he did not test it on infected animals, and he thought it would not last long enough in the body to cure infection. He went back to other work, his paper attracted little attention, and for more than ten years penicillin was not used to treat anyone.

In the longer term, though, the discovery was hugely significant because it was the essential starting point. Ernst Chain found Fleming's paper in about 1938, and he and Howard Florey's team at Oxford purified penicillin, showed in 1940 that it cured infected mice, and first used it on a patient in 1941. During the Second World War American drug companies mass-produced it, so by D-Day in 1944 there was enough to treat Allied casualties. Penicillin was the first antibiotic: it cured killers such as pneumonia, septicaemia and meningitis, made surgery far safer and, after 1948, was available free on the NHS. It also began the search for other antibiotics, such as streptomycin for TB.

The discovery is still significant today because of Fleming's own warning in 1945 that misuse would create resistant bacteria, a problem seen in superbugs such as MRSA. Overall, Fleming's discovery was the beginning of the antibiotic age, but its significance depended on the work of Florey and Chain and on wartime mass production.

Explanation

Fleming discovered penicillin by chance in 1928 but could not turn it into a usable drug; Florey and Chain did that from 1938-41, and wartime mass production made it widely available. A Level 4 answer contrasts the limited short-term significance with the long-term significance (first antibiotic, antibiotic age, resistance).

Mark scheme
  1. 8 marks

    Levels of response (8 marks).
    Level 4 (7-8 marks): Complex explanation of aspects of significance, e.g. explains that at the time the discovery had little impact (Fleming could not purify or mass-produce penicillin and his 1929 paper was largely ignored) but that in the longer term it was the essential starting point for Florey and Chain's work, the first antibiotic and the antibiotic age, supported by accurate, detailed knowledge; may judge how far the significance belongs to Fleming.
    Level 3 (5-6 marks): Developed explanation of aspects of significance: explains two or more aspects (e.g. short-term and long-term) with relevant specific knowledge.
    Level 2 (3-4 marks): Simple explanation of one aspect of significance, e.g. it led to the first antibiotic, with some knowledge.
    Level 1 (1-2 marks): Basic explanation of significance: general statements about penicillin with little knowledge.
    0 marks: nothing worthy of credit.

    Indicative content (not a checklist; credit other valid points): The discovery: Fleming, a bacteriologist at St Mary's Hospital, London, had seen soldiers die of infected wounds in the First World War and had already discovered lysozyme (1922); in September 1928 he returned from holiday to find a mould (Penicillium) had contaminated a plate of staphylococci and killed the bacteria around it; chance played a part (spores probably came from a laboratory below; the weather suited mould then bacteria). Short term: he grew the mould, named the substance penicillin and published his findings in 1929; but he could not purify or produce enough of it, did not test it on infected animals, thought it would not last long enough in the body, and turned to other work - the paper attracted little attention and penicillin was not used as a drug for over a decade. Long term: the paper was found by Ernst Chain about 1938, leading to Florey and Chain's Oxford research (mouse test 1940, first patient 1941) and mass production in the USA during the war (enough for D-Day casualties in 1944); penicillin was the first antibiotic and began the antibiotic age (streptomycin, 1943, and many others), curing infections such as pneumonia, septicaemia, meningitis and gonorrhoea; it made surgery much safer; with the NHS it became widely available after 1948. Recognition: Fleming became famous from 1942 and shared the 1945 Nobel Prize with Florey and Chain. Warning: in 1945 he warned that misuse could create resistant bacteria - antibiotic resistance (MRSA) is now a major problem. Judgement: hugely significant in the long run, but its significance depended on others.

Question 3

8 marks

Explain two ways in which the Black Death in 1348-49 and the arrival of HIV/AIDS in Britain in the 1980s were similar.

Model answer

One similarity is that both were new diseases which doctors did not understand and could not cure. When the Black Death reached England in 1348, physicians blamed God, bad air (miasma), the alignment of the planets or an imbalance of the four humours, and their remedies, such as bleeding, herbs and prayer, were useless; perhaps a third to a half of the population died. Its real cause, a bacterium spread by rat fleas, was not discovered until the 1890s. Similarly, when AIDS appeared in the early 1980s - the first British death was in 1982 - doctors did not know what caused it. The virus, HIV, was identified in 1983-84, but there was no effective treatment until AZT in 1987, and even that had only a limited effect until combination therapy arrived in 1996. In both cases medicine was helpless at first.

A second similarity is that, because the diseases were frightening and not understood, both led to people interpreting them as punishments and blaming particular groups, while the authorities concentrated on prevention. In 1348-49 many believed the plague was God's punishment for sin; flagellants, who whipped themselves to show repentance, reached London in 1349, and in Europe Jews were blamed and attacked. In the 1980s some newspapers called AIDS a 'gay plague' and some religious figures described it as a punishment, so gay men and drug users faced prejudice. In both cases the authorities, unable to cure, tried to stop the spread: Edward III ordered the streets of London to be cleaned in 1349, and in 1986-87 the government's 'Don't Die of Ignorance' campaign sent a leaflet to every household urging people to protect themselves.

Explanation

The Black Death and AIDS were both new diseases with unknown causes and no cure at first, which produced fear, blame and religious explanations, and responses aimed at prevention. Level 4 needs two developed similarities, each with specific knowledge of both diseases, explaining why they were similar.

Mark scheme
  1. 8 marks

    Levels of response (8 marks).
    Level 4 (7-8 marks): Complex explanation of similarities: explains two similarities between the Black Death and HIV/AIDS, each supported with specific knowledge of both, and analyses why they were similar (e.g. both were new diseases whose cause was not understood and which doctors could not cure, so fear led to blame and to responses aimed at prevention).
    Level 3 (5-6 marks): Developed explanation of similarities: explains one or two similarities with relevant specific knowledge of both.
    Level 2 (3-4 marks): Simple explanation of one similarity, with some knowledge of both, e.g. both had no cure.
    Level 1 (1-2 marks): Basic explanation: identifies a similarity, or describes one or both diseases, with little comparison.
    0 marks: nothing worthy of credit.

    Indicative content (not a checklist; credit other valid points): New diseases with no understood cause and no cure: the Black Death reached England in 1348 and may have killed a third to a half of the population; people blamed God's punishment, miasma (bad air), the alignment of the planets or imbalance of the humours, and treatments (bleeding, herbs, posies, prayer) failed - the cause (a bacterium spread by rat fleas) was not known until the 1890s. AIDS was first identified in 1981; the first British death was in 1982; HIV was identified in 1983-84; there was no effective treatment until AZT (1987), which had limited effect, and combination therapy (1996). Fear, blame and religious interpretations: in 1348-49 many saw plague as punishment for sin; flagellants whipped themselves (they reached London in 1349); in Europe Jews were blamed and attacked. In the 1980s some newspapers called AIDS a 'gay plague', some religious figures called it a punishment, and gay men and drug users faced prejudice. Responses focused on prevention rather than cure: Edward III ordered the streets of London to be cleaned (1349); people fled or avoided the sick. The government's 'AIDS: Don't Die of Ignorance' campaign (1986-87) sent a leaflet to every household and urged safer sex; needle exchanges; screening of donated blood from 1985. Both caused widespread fear far beyond the numbers killed in the case of AIDS. Credit differences only where used to explain the similarity.

Question 4

20 marks

Has the role of the individual been the main factor in progress in the treatment of disease in Britain?

Explain your answer with reference to the role of the individual and other factors. Use a range of examples from across your study of Health and the people: c1000 to the present day.

[16 marks] [SPaG 4 marks]

Model answer

Individuals have played a vital role in the treatment of disease, both in encouraging and in holding back progress. However, I will argue that individuals were rarely the main factor on their own: their ideas only led to progress when science and technology, government, war and communication allowed them to.

The influence of one individual is clearest in the Middle Ages, but it slowed progress. Galen's theory of the four humours and his idea of treating illness with opposites dominated medicine for more than a thousand years. Physicians trained at universities learned his books, and because his belief in a creator fitted Christian teaching, the Church supported his ideas. As a result, medieval doctors continued to bleed and purge patients, and no one seriously challenged him. Even when Vesalius showed in 1543 that Galen's anatomy contained errors, and Harvey proved in 1628 that the blood circulates, treatment hardly changed, because individuals alone could not overturn established ideas.

From the eighteenth century, individuals began to make real breakthroughs. Edward Jenner noticed that milkmaids who caught cowpox did not catch smallpox, tested his idea on James Phipps in 1796 and published his results in 1798. In the nineteenth century Louis Pasteur proved germ theory in 1861, and Robert Koch identified the bacteria that cause TB and cholera. Paul Ehrlich's Salvarsan 606 of 1909 was the first magic bullet, and in 1928 Alexander Fleming discovered penicillin. Without these individuals' insight and determination, these advances might have come much later.

However, almost all of them depended on other factors. Jenner's vaccine only reached the whole population because Parliament gave him grants of 10,000 pounds in 1802 and 20,000 pounds in 1807 and made vaccination compulsory in 1853. Pasteur and Koch relied on improved microscopes and on government funding encouraged by rivalry between France and Germany; both led teams, and it was Pasteur's assistant Chamberland whose mistake revealed weakened vaccines. Fleming's discovery was partly chance and he could not develop it. It took Florey, Chain and Heatley's team at Oxford, then the Second World War and American government money, to mass-produce penicillin. Fleming's paper was only noticed because Chain read it, which shows the importance of communication.

In the modern period the role of lone individuals has become smaller still. New drugs are developed by large teams in pharmaceutical companies, tested under government regulation introduced after thalidomide, and paid for by the NHS, created by Aneurin Bevan in 1948 but funded by the state. The COVID-19 vaccines of 2020 were the work of large teams, backed by billions of pounds of government money.

In conclusion, individuals have been very important: they provided the ideas behind almost every major breakthrough, and Galen's influence shows that they could also block progress. But they were not the main factor, because their ideas only led to better treatment when science and technology made them possible and government, war and industry provided the money and organisation to use them. The most important developments, such as penicillin, came when individuals and these factors worked together.

Explanation

Individuals such as Jenner, Pasteur, Koch, Fleming, Florey and Chain made breakthroughs, while Galen's authority shows individuals could also inhibit change. A Level 4 essay weighs individuals against science and technology, government, war, chance and communication across the whole period and reaches a sustained judgement; SPaG is marked separately.

Mark scheme
  1. 16 marks

    Levels of response (16 marks).
    Level 4 (13-16 marks): Complex explanation of the role of the individual and other factors leading to a sustained judgement about whether individuals have been the main factor, supported by a range of accurate, specific examples from across the whole period, e.g. explains the contributions (and sometimes the inhibiting influence) of individuals such as Galen, Jenner, Pasteur, Koch, Fleming, Florey and Chain, and weighs them against science and technology, government, war, chance and communication, recognising how individuals depended on these factors.
    Level 3 (9-12 marks): Developed explanation of the role of the individual and other factor(s), with relevant specific examples from more than one period; there may be a judgement, but it is not fully sustained.
    Level 2 (5-8 marks): Simple explanation of individuals and/or other factor(s), with a limited range of examples or a narrow time span.
    Level 1 (1-4 marks): Basic explanation of one or more factors: general statements or narrative with little relevant knowledge.
    0 marks: nothing worthy of credit.

    Indicative content (not a checklist; credit other valid points): Individuals who inhibited progress: Galen's ideas (the four humours, theory of opposites) dominated medicine for over 1,000 years, supported by the Church. Individuals who encouraged progress: Vesalius (1543) and Harvey (1628) challenged Galen, though treatment changed little; Thomas Sydenham (17th century) stressed careful observation of symptoms; Jenner (1796) developed smallpox vaccination and published it (1798); Pasteur (germ theory 1861; vaccines 1879-85); Koch (TB 1882, cholera 1883); Ehrlich (Salvarsan 1909); Domagk (Prontosil 1932); Fleming (penicillin 1928); Florey, Chain and Heatley (1938-41); Dorothy Hodgkin (structure of penicillin); Aneurin Bevan (NHS 1948); James Black (beta-blockers). Limits of individuals: they worked in teams (Pasteur with Chamberland and Roux; Koch's team; Hata found compound 606); they depended on technology (microscopes, dyes, fermentation tanks), on government money (German state funding for Koch; Parliament's grants to Jenner of 10,000 pounds in 1802 and 20,000 pounds in 1807; US funding of penicillin), on war (Second World War), on chance (Fleming's mould; Chamberland's mistake) and on communication (printing; journals; Chain finding Fleming's paper). Individuals also resisted progress (opponents of vaccination; doctors who rejected germ theory). Possible judgements: individuals were essential catalysts, but their impact depended on the other factors; or individuals were the main factor because each major breakthrough began with a person's insight; or in the modern period teams, industry and government matter more than individuals.

  2. 4 marks

    SPaG. High performance (4 marks): spells and punctuates with consistent accuracy; uses rules of grammar with effective control of meaning overall; uses a wide range of specialist terms as appropriate.
    Intermediate performance (2-3 marks): spells and punctuates with considerable accuracy; uses rules of grammar with general control of meaning overall; uses a good range of specialist terms as appropriate.
    Threshold performance (1 mark): spells and punctuates with reasonable accuracy; uses rules of grammar with some control of meaning and any errors do not significantly hinder meaning overall; uses a limited range of specialist terms as appropriate.
    0 marks: the student writes nothing, or the response does not relate to the question, or errors severely hinder meaning.

    SPaG marks are awarded only if the answer relates to the question.

Ready to try the rest? Every answer you write is marked against the mark scheme, so you can see exactly where the marks are.

AI Tutor Hints first, answers after you try

Hi! Stuck? Ask me for a hint and I’ll help you work it out. Once you’ve checked your answer I can explain exactly where the marks are.