Information

30 May 1940


Fifth day of Operation Dynamo, the evacuation from Dunkirk. 53,823 men reach Britain.

The War at Sea, 1939-1945, Volume I: The Defensive, S. W. Roskill. This first volume in the British official history of the war at sea covers the period from the outbreak of the war through to the first British disasters in the Pacific in December 1941. Amongst other topics it covers the Norwegian campaign, the evacuation from Dunkirk and the first two years of the Battle of the Atlantic. The text is meticulously researched, and is rooted in a detailed study of wartime records, both British and German. [see more]


Important Events From This day in History May 30th

1911 : The first ever running of the Indianapolis 500 is won by Ray Harrounat at an average speed of 74.59 miles an hour.

1922 U.S.A. Lincoln Memorial

1922 : The Lincoln Memorial built to honor Abraham Lincoln the 16th president of the United States, is dedicated by Former President William Howard Taft in Washington, D.C.

1937 U.S.A. Memorial Day Massacre

1937 : The Memorial Day Massacre takes place when Ten union demonstrators are killed and 84 are wounded when police opened fire in front of the South Chicago Republic Steel plant.

1959 England Hovercraft

1959 : The first full size hovercraft , the SR-N1, designed by Sir Christopher Cockerell, is launched and tested at Cowes on the Isle of Wight.

Born This Day In History 30th May

Celebrating Birthdays Today

Born: May 30th, 1971 London, England

Known For : Duncan Jones is a director, producer, and screenwriter. Most of his work has been in science fiction or fantasy genres. He is known for his films Moon (2009), Source Code (2011), Warcraft (2016), and Mute (2018). He is the son of famous musician David Bowie and model Angie Bowie. His debut feature film, Moon, was nominated for seven British Independent Film Awards and two BAFTAs.

Portable Bathtub With Water Heater

Many if not most rural homes in the twenties did not have full indoor plumbing so this was your best chance of having a hot bath, the water heater could be a Gasoline or Kerosine based burner, To use the bathtub you first needed to fill the tank with water ( held 12 gallons ), next light the burner and when ready fill the bath, to empty the bath attach the 6ft length of hose to the water outlet and drain out through the nearest window.

1937 Spanish Civil War

1937 : For the first time in the Spanish Civil War a foreign power has been openly involved in the bombing of the Spanish port of Almeria, Four German War ships bombed the city causing the loss of 400 lives. There are growing concerns that this could lead to a full scale war in Europe and the British foreign secretary Anthony Eden has appealed to Germany to take no further action.

1967 Biafra Independence

1967 : Biafra proclaims its independence from Nigeria, but war breaks out in July and Nigerian forces take control of oil fields leaving the country no form of revenue which causes mass starvation of over 1,000,000 people. In January 1970 Biafra surrenders to Nigerian forces and becomes part of Nigeria once again losing it's independence.

1954 U.S.A. Tornado's Nebraska

1954 : A series of tornadoes and torrential rain has struck Nebraska leaving 6 dead and many more injured and homeless 10 miles southeast of Norfolk.

1967 Egypt Destruction of Israel

1967 : President of Egypt President Nasser states in a public statement that his basic objective is the destruction of Israel. King Hussein of Jordan together with other Arab Countries have now signed a pact that any attack on either of them is an attack on all and will take measures including the use of armed forces to repulse such an attack".

1967 Soviet Union to support Arab countries against Israel

1967 : Following the statement by the Soviet Union to support Arab countries against Israel, 10 Additional Soviet Warships are travelling through the Dardanelles on the way to the Mediterranean sea where the US 6th Fleet is based, together with the very fragile peace in the middle east many are hoping this is a political mover rather than a military buildup by the soviets.

1967 U.S.A. Evel Knievel

1967 : Evel Knievel the motorcycle daredevil stuntman successfully clears sixteen cars in Gardena, California.

1971 U.S.A. Mariner 9 Launched

1971 : The US space probe Mariner 9 was launched on its mission to Mars. Where it will send more than 7,000 pictures of the planet back to Earth.

1979 U.S.A. DC 10's Grounded

1979 : Following the Crash of an American Airlines DC 10 in Chicago earlier this week with the loss of 274 lives all DC 10's are currently undergoing inspections of the engine mountain bolts by government inspections prior to use.

Born This Day In History 30th May

Celebrating Birthdays Today

Born: May 30th, 1907, Vitebsk, Russia

Died: 1988 (date and location unknown)

Known For : Valentina was a Soviet actress that starred in a number of social and political dramas that were set there. One of her main roles was as Natasha Artemieva in the Maxim Trilogy that included 1935's Yunost Maksima, 1937's Vozvrashcheniye Maksima and 1939's Vyborgskaya Storona (where she played opposite Boris Chirkov). Her later movies included 1953's Vragi and Lyubov Yarovaya, 1959's Dostigaev i Drugie, 1961's Hranice Neznáma and 1966's Ne Zabud. Stantsiya Lugovaya. Some of these films were set in the Bolshevik rebellion and some were set in World War II.

Nintendo Entertainment System
Manufacturer: Nintendo
Price: $89.99

Introducing the Nintendo Entertainment System. It's a fully equipped video system with the most progressive components such as a robot and a light-sensing Zapper Light Gun (sold separately), true to life graphics and a vast library of games. Plus, it's not just for kids. The system is both simple and sophisticated enough to challenge the abilities of everyone in your family. The core of the system is the Nintendo Control Deck. Its compact and sleek design is just the beginning. Inside the control deck are two microchips that provide extremely high quality and real-life sound generation. Includes Super Mario Brothers game, two controllers with six feet cords, and hookup accessories.

1981 Bangladesh Attempted Coup

1981 : Following an attempted coup in Bangladesh the President Ziaur Rahman was murdered, The vice president has imposed strict curfews in Dacca and surrounding towns and cities and there is ongoing fighting between loyalist troops and the rebels led by Major General Abul Manzur.

1990 England BSE

1990 : British Beef exports are hit further as France bans imports of British beef and live cattle because of fears over BSE, or "mad cow" disease. Germany and Italy join the ban 2 days later and by 1996 there was a worldwide ban on all British beef exports. This was lifted in 1999 by all countries except France and Germany, which lifted the ban in 2000.

1996 England Prince Andrew Divorce

1996 : Prince Andrew and the former Sarah Ferguson, Duchess of York (Fergie) were granted an uncontested decree ending their 10-year marriage, they have two children by the marriage Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie, who are respectively fifth and sixth line of succession to the British Throne.

1997 U.S.A. "Megan's Law"

1997 : Child molester Jesse K. Timmendequas is convicted in Trenton, N.J., of raping and strangling seven year old Megan Kanka, the case inspired "Megan's Law," which requires that communities be notified when sex offenders move in.

2008 China 200,000 Evacuated

2008 : The earthquake that occurred in China three weeks ago is causing additional major problems including Lake Tangjiashan a lake that was created during the earthquake now risks breaking through the dams and flooding large areas of Mianyang, so far over 200,000 have been evacuated. It is a race between the Chinese troops who are digging diversion channels to relieve pressure on the lake and nature which is filling the lake to overflowing at an alarming rate.

2012 Liberia Charles Taylor Gets Fifty Years in Prison

2012 : Former leader of Liberia Charles Taylor was sentenced to fifty years in jail by a UN-backed war crimes court. Taylor had earlier been found guilty of aiding and abetting Sierra Leone rebels during a 1991 to 2002 civil war. Taylor has claimed innocence and his lawyer has said they will appeal against the sentence.

2013 Spain Bon Jovi Waives Concert Fee

2013 : The US band Bon Jovi has waived their normal concert fee for their upcoming concert in Madrid, Spain. They did this over concerns about the country's economic crisis and were worried that fans would not be able to afford the regularly priced tickets. The tickets were thus priced much lower than usual and sold out very quickly.

1950s Prices including inflation prices for homes, wages etc,

Baby Boomers raise families following 20 years of unrest ( Great Depression and World War II ) the peak of the Baby Boomer Years

Includes Music, Fashion, Prices, News for each Year, Popular Culture, Technology and More.


The Defence of Calais (30 Infantry Brigade)

The Defence of Calais in May 1940 is one of the most entralling and yet most tragic battles during the Second World War. It was a time of much confusion and alarm as German armoured forces reached the Channel coast near the posts of Boulogne and Calais, thereby cutting off the British Expeditionary Force and French 1 Army from the rest of the French Army.

DOWNLOADABLE DOCUMENTS (pdfs)

At this time, the eventual evacuation of the vast majority of the B.E.F. from Dunkirk was nowhere near certain or even likely. Defeat and possible capture of the entire B.E.F. was a real possibility. It was in these circumstances that the new Prime Minister, and the War Cabinet, decided to sent ad-hoc forces to Boulogne and Calais to hold these ports and delay the German advance towards Dunkirk from the south.

The troops sent to Boulogne were landed and within a day evacuated safely back to the U.K.. For the men of the 30 Infantry Brigade, which was hurriedly sent to Calais with an armoured regiment from the 1 Armoured Division, their fate was very different. For four days and nights, together with some determined French soldiers, they held off German armour and infantry troops, steadily being forced back within a shrinking perimeter. They were subject to frequently bombing raids by German aircraft, that reduced large parts of pre-war Calais to rubble.

Unknown to most of the men, the Prime Minister (Winston CHURCHILL) and the War Cabinet had decided NOT to evacuate the men of 30 Infantry Brigade from Calais. A decision had been taken to deliberately sacrifice these men in order to give more time for the evacuation to proceed at Dunkirk. Short of food, water and ammunition (apparently, at the end, some soldiers took to throwing empty wine bottles at German troops), exhausted physically and mentally, the French and British soldiers fought on until the inevitable end on Sunday 26 May 1940.

We know the outcome and what these men achieved, but many men did not. Some were killed and now lie in the Calais Southern Cemetery or are remembered on the Dunkirk Memorial. Other managed to escape by a most ingenuous variety of ways. However, for most men (several of whom had been injured), five years of captivity lay ahead in Germany, Poland and other occupied countries.


30 May 1940 - History

Air Observor in London

With France defeated Germany turned it attention to England, which Hitler was hoping would sue for peace. An invasion of Britain was a difficult task requiring both control of the sea and the air, neither of which Germany had. Despite , Hitler ordered preparation for that invasion to begin under code name Operation Sealion. In the meantime on July 16th, 1940 he issued Fuhrer Directive (No. 16). That order called on the Luftwaffe to gain control of the air, destroy all naval vessels in the potential landing areas, destroy coastal defenses and annihilate the reserves behind the lines. The Battle of Britain was ready to begin.
Each side had advantages. The British started with 1,900 aircraft and the Germans with 2,550 planes. The Germans had more pilots, but the British were producing new aircraft faster than the Germans. The British had another very important advantage radar stations along the channel coast, which were tied to a very effective command and control structure that allowed the British airforce to vector aircraft to meet the incoming German planes. Finally the German planes had to fly 100 mile to reach their target, the British just had to rise to fighting altitude, and if a British pilot had to bail he could be back in the cockpit the next day, while the German would be a prisoner of war.

The first stage of the battle had already begun on July 10 with attacks on the coast towns of Weymouth, Falmouth, Portsmouth and Dover. This first stage lasted until July 30th and during the period 180 German aircraft were shot down as opposed to the loss of 70 British fighters. One hundred of the German planes shot down were bombers so the exchange ratio between the two sides of fighter planes was about equal . The Germans managed to sink 40,000 tons of shipping but no significant naval vessels.

On August 1st, Hitler ordered a change of direction, the new aim was to destroy the RAF. Initially the RAF seemed to have the upper hand. On August 13th the first day of the engagement the RAF lost 13 planes defending a Spitfire factory while the Germans lost 45. Slowly however, the relentless German attacks were destroying both radar stations, damaging factories and airfield.

The slow gains that the Luftwaffe was making was not fast enough for Hitler, his window to attack England would soon close- so he ordered that attacks move to London in the hope of terrorizing the British into surrender. The British capital was well defended with 1500 barrage balloons, 2,000 anti aircraft guns and almost all of the British fighter force prepared to scramble to its defense. For ten days the Germans attacked. On September 15th when the largest force yet 200 German bombers headed for London. Fighter command vectored fighters from other part of England met the German bombers the east of London. They shot down 60 of the bombers before they could even reach the area of London. It became clear that the attacks would not achieve their goal of breaking the British. On September 17th Hitler announced the postponement of Sealion. Daylight raids continued through September and after that the Luftwaffe turned to much less accurate nighttime bombing. That bombing was terrifying for the inhabitants and was what was considered the classic Blitz of London, however, it was not an effective weapon of war. The Battle of Britain had been won by 2,500 British and foreign airman. Churchill’s remark that never had so many owed so much to so few was accurate. In total the RAF fighter command had lost 832 fighter while the Luftwaffe lost 668 fighter, but the Luftwaffe lost an additional 600 bombers.


History Of ‍ Memorial Day

Memorial Day, originally called Decoration Day, is a day of remembrance for those who have died in service of the United States of America. It's difficult to prove the origins of this day as over two dozen towns and cities lay claim to be the birthplace. In May 1966, President Lyndon Johnson stepped in and officially declared Waterloo N.Y. the birthplace of Memorial Day.

Regardless of the location of origins or the exact date, one thing is crystal clear – Memorial Day was borne out of the Civil War (which ended in 1865) and a desire to honor our dead. On the 5th of May in 1868, General John Logan who was the national commander of the Grand Army of the republic, officially proclaimed it in his General Order No. 11.

Part of the history of Memorial Day will show that in the Order, the General proclaimed, “The 30th of May, 1868, is designated for the purpose of strewing with flowers, or otherwise decorating the graves of comrades who died in defense of their country during the late rebellion, and whose bodies now lie in almost every city, village and hamlet churchyard in the land.” Because the day wasn't the anniversary of any particular battle, the General called it, The date of Decoration Day.

On the first Decoration Day, 5,000 participants decorated the graves of 20,000 Union and Confederate soldiers buried at Arlington Cemetery while General James Garfield made a historic speech.

New York was the first state to officially recognize the holiday in 1873. It was recognized by all northern states by 1890. Differently, the South refused to acknowledge the day and honored their dead on separate days. This went on until after World War I when the holiday changed from honoring just those who died fighting in the Civil War to honoring Americans who died fighting in any war.

With the Congressional passage of the National Holiday Act of 1971 (P.L. 90 – 363), it is now observed on the last Monday in May by almost every state.

This helped ensure a three day weekend (Memorial Day Weekend) for Federal holidays. In addition, several southern states have an additional separate day for honoring the Confederate war dead: January 19th in Texas April 26th in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, and Mississippi May 10th in South Carolina and June 3rd (Jefferson Davis’ birthday) in Louisiana and Tennessee .

History of Memorial Day: Red Poppies

In 1915, inspired by the poem “In Flanders Fields,” Moina Michael replied with her own poem:

She then conceived of an idea to wear red poppies on Memorial day in honor of those who died serving the nation during war. She was the first to wear one, and sold poppies to her friends and co-workers with the money going to benefit servicemen in need. See more on the significance of the Red Poppy.

Later a Madam Guerin from France was visiting the United States and learned of this new custom started by Ms. Michael. When she returned to France she made artificial red poppies to raise money for war orphaned children and widowed women. This tradition spread to other countries. In 1921, the Franco-American Children’s League sold poppies nationally to benefit war orphans of France and Belgium. The League disbanded a year later and Madam Guerin approached the VFW for help.

Shortly before Memorial Day in 1922 the VFW became the first veterans’ organization to nationally sell poppies. Two years later their “Buddy” Poppy program was selling artificial poppies made by disabled veterans. In 1948 the US Post Office honored Ms. Michael for her role in founding the National Poppy movement by issuing a red 3 cent postage stamp with her likeness on it.


Re: Abbeville 1940

Post by tigre » 07 Aug 2010, 20:50

Hello to all more about this topic.

Abbeville 27 May till 05 Jun of 1940.

Abbeville, First attack. 25 – 27 of May of 1940.

The 57th ID's way to Abbeville.

From 24 to May 27, 1940 marching parallel to the front, the artillery fire was stronger, the burning villages could be seen at night, and the confusion grew. Origny St.Benoite - Hornblieres - St.Quentin - Peronne -Bopaume - St. Albert - Bellenglise - Basentin – Fixcourt.

On May 28, 1940 take-over with a motorized division which continued towards the Canal. First firing position at Flesseles near Abbeville. Baptism of fire in the building of the positions under heavy artillery fire. On the night shift towards positions around Bellancourt.

Sources: Lost Victories. Erich v. Manstein.
http://batailles-1939-1940.historyboard . s-t104.htm
Militaria Magazine Hs21 Le Mois Terrible La Bataille D'abbeville.
In zwanzig Minuten elf Feindpanzer abgeschossen. Ralph Tegethoff http://www.deutsche-stimme.de/ds/ De junio de 2004.
http://www.deutsche-stimme.de/ds/
The Destruction of 12th Division. 20th May 1940 by Pete Gill http://www.magweb.com
Heimat Wolfur. Set 1992. Tagebuch eines Wolfurters zwischen 1939 und 1946.

Re: Abbeville 1940

Post by tigre » 14 Aug 2010, 16:40

Hello to all more about this topic.

Abbeville 27 May till 05 Jun of 1940.

Abbeville, Second Attack. 25 – 27 of May of 1940.

The 4 DCR under General De Gaulle, comprised two half-brigades: one the 6 Demi-Brigade with tanks B1 bis and the other the 8 Demi-Brigade with Light tanks R-35 besides it had a cavalry element with tanks Somua and had as infantry the 22ème RIC plus the 4 BCP (Bataillon de Chasseurs Portés). It had on hand well tested artillery.

During the night from 27 to 28 May 1940, the French units were assembled around Poix when they were told that an attack against the bridgehead at Abbeville was expected to be carried out next day. Indeed that same night it took place the relief of the German troops, being deployed there the 57 ID (Bavarian) under General Blümm subordinated to the XXXVIII AK of General v. Manstein. This was a division of second order that had already seen the combat in Poland.

On May 28 1940, at noon, General De Gaulle had a meeting with his subordinated and issued their tasks: the cavalry and the colonial Infantry should attack from south to north, from Bellifontaine to Mareuil-Caubert the light tanks from Limeaux to Caumont and Huchenneville while the heavy tanks with the 4 BCP along the axis Huppy – Les Croisettes – Caubert.

Sources: Lost Victories. Erich v. Manstein.
http://batailles-1939-1940.historyboard . s-t104.htm
Militaria Magazine Hs21 Le Mois Terrible La Bataille D'abbeville.
In zwanzig Minuten elf Feindpanzer abgeschossen. Ralph Tegethoff http://www.deutsche-stimme.de/ds/ De junio de 2004.
http://www.deutsche-stimme.de/ds/
The Destruction of 12th Division. 20th May 1940 by Pete Gill http://www.magweb.com
Heimat Wolfur. Set 1992. Tagebuch eines Wolfurters zwischen 1939 und 1946.

Re: Abbeville 1940

Post by tigre » 22 Aug 2010, 02:14

Hello to all more about this topic.

Abbeville 27 May till 05 Jun of 1940.

Abbeville, Second Attack. 28 – 30 of May of 1940.

At 13:00 the conference of Oisemont was over. The Unit's Commanders, whose units were up to 10 or 15 kilometers of distance had just a short time to occupy their positions. Anyway, this excludes any previous reconnaissance of the ground. The most part of the tank crewmen regroups behind Bellifontaine. The 44 º BCC assembled its R.35 in the bois of Limeux and the heavy tanks gained Doudelainville. The 4ème Chasseur marched from Oisemont to Warcheville. De Gaulle was in Mérélessart.

The regiment was to attack at 17:00 hours after a short artillery preparation and with the support of tanks on the axis Bailleul, Villers-sur-Mareuil, Mareuil, Monts-Caubert and a front of 5 km.

The order of attack of Colonel Le Tacon was:

The attack will be executed by

- The 1st Battalion, right up to Bailleul, with a frontage of about 2km
- The 2nd Battalion, left up to Limeux, approximately 2km front, link to the left with the battalion of chasseurs of the armored division,
- The 3rd Battalion will march as a reserve behind 2nd Battalion and astride the road Limeux, Caumont, Mont-Caubert.

Objective 1 was limited to the right by the north edge of the Bois de Fréchencourt and left by the boundary north of Caumont.

The 2nd Goal to the right by Caubert and to the left by the western slopes of Mont-Caubert.

Sources: Lost Victories. Erich v. Manstein.
http://batailles-1939-1940.historyboard . s-t104.htm
Militaria Magazine Hs21 Le Mois Terrible La Bataille D'abbeville.
In zwanzig Minuten elf Feindpanzer abgeschossen. Ralph Tegethoff http://www.deutsche-stimme.de/ds/ De junio de 2004.
http://www.deutsche-stimme.de/ds/
The Destruction of 12th Division. 20th May 1940 by Pete Gill http://www.magweb.com
Heimat Wolfur. Set 1992. Tagebuch eines Wolfurters zwischen 1939 und 1946.
Section patrimoine des Amis du CIS Nº 13. Les Années de guerre.

Re: Abbeville 1940

Post by tigre » 29 Aug 2010, 17:36

Hello to all more about this topic.

Abbeville 27 May till 05 Jun of 1940.

Abbeville, Second Attack. 28 – 30 of May of 1940.

At 17:00 hours, a powerful artillery preparation of 6000 shells was unleashed on the positions of the Somme and the Mont de Caubert. Immediately after that, the attack was launched. The liaison officers followed the actions and reported them to Mérélessart. Soon, it was see that the preparation time was short and that not everyone was able to move forward together. The riders and the colonial troops were overdue. After advancing 500 meters the 22 º RIC was nailed to the ground by the German fire. However, Huppy was conquered after heavy fighting, Caumont was reached and the bois de Fréchencourt was exceeded.

At 18:00 hours the tanks arrived and the attack was resumed at 19:00 hours the 1st Battalion seized the towns of Bailleul and Bellifontaine. At 21:00 hours the same happened with the Mill of Bellevue and the bois Fréchencourt. The 2nd Battalion took the mill of Limeux and the town and castle of Caumont, strongly defended. The 3rd Battalion progressed to Caumont Castle Park, where it was placed the CP of the Regiment. At 22:00 hours the night had fallen through, and all the battalions reinforced their positions, the losses were severe. The attack must be continued at 05:00 hours the following morning.

Sources: Lost Victories. Erich v. Manstein.
http://batailles-1939-1940.historyboard . s-t104.htm
Militaria Magazine Hs21 Le Mois Terrible La Bataille D'abbeville.
In zwanzig Minuten elf Feindpanzer abgeschossen. Ralph Tegethoff http://www.deutsche-stimme.de/ds/ De junio de 2004.
http://www.deutsche-stimme.de/ds/
The Destruction of 12th Division. 20th May 1940 by Pete Gill http://www.magweb.com
Heimat Wolfur. Set 1992. Tagebuch eines Wolfurters zwischen 1939 und 1946.
Section patrimoine des Amis du CIS Nº 13. Les Années de guerre.

Re: Abbeville 1940

Post by tigre » 05 Sep 2010, 15:27

Hello to all more about this topic.

Abbeville 27 May till 05 Jun of 1940.

Abbeville, Second Attack. 28 – 30 of May of 1940.

The Infantry continued behind the heavy tanks to Huppy. Despite the surprise the Germans still hold the town and hide themselves in the way of the tanks, which were by now at Croisettes. The Cdt. Bertrand, who has made all of the 1914-1918’s war, maneuver and research in the village. There he collected more than 300 prisoners. Some elements had already reached Bienfay. By nightfall, the Germans have retreated 4 km.

The booty was considerable. Huppy, the Croisette, Caumont, Huchenneville, Bray were achieved. Some tanks of the 44 B.C.C. had even reached Mareuil, but had to retreat without support. It was an undeniable success for the French. De Gaulle moved to Huppy’s Castle.

Sources: Lost Victories. Erich v. Manstein.
http://batailles-1939-1940.historyboard . s-t104.htm
Militaria Magazine Hs21 Le Mois Terrible La Bataille D'abbeville.
In zwanzig Minuten elf Feindpanzer abgeschossen. Ralph Tegethoff http://www.deutsche-stimme.de/ds/ De junio de 2004.
http://www.deutsche-stimme.de/ds/
The Destruction of 12th Division. 20th May 1940 by Pete Gill http://www.magweb.com
Heimat Wolfur. Set 1992. Tagebuch eines Wolfurters zwischen 1939 und 1946.
Section patrimoine des Amis du CIS Nº 13. Les Années de guerre.

Re: Abbeville 1940

Post by tigre » 12 Sep 2010, 13:41

Hello to all more about this topic.

Abbeville 27 May till 05 Jun of 1940.

Abbeville, Second Attack. 28 – 30 of May of 1940.

The General Commanding Officer of the XXXVIII AK (v. Manstein) recalled: At Abbeville, on the other hand, things took a critical turn on 29th May. Here, after a series of strenuous marches, 57 Infantry Division, which had so far no experience of action, had taken over from 2 Motorized Division. Shortly after its arrival an enemy attack supported by strong British armour broke into a number of German positions and caused heavy losses not only in killed and wounded, but also, as was later discovered, in prisoners. I myself had driven out to Abbeville just in time to meet a German battalion which, probably through having misunderstood its orders, had evacuated its positions and was now marching back through the town. I turned it straight round again, and in due course the division was master of the situation.

On May 29 the attack was resumed. Unfortunately during the night the Germans had reinforced the bridgehead with antiaircraft guns, the mighty 88. Until then opposed the French tanks the Pak 36 guns of 37 mm manned by brave crews that shot at the last minute and many of them were crushed by tank’s tracks of the armored French . But these weapons were not match for the French vehicles which had a good armor.


Fall of France

If the tanks succeed, then victory follows.

Heinz Guderian

By May 1940, Europe had been at war for nine months. Yet Britain and France, despite having declared war on Germany in September 1939 following Hitler's attack on Poland, had seen little real fighting. This tense period of anticipation – which came to be known as the 'Phoney War' – met an abrupt end on 10 May 1940, when Germany launched an invasion of France and the Low Countries.

The German plan of attack, codenamed Case Yellow, entailed an armoured offensive through the Ardennes Forest, which bypassed the strong French frontier defences of the Maginot Line. The advance would then threaten to encircle French and British divisions to the north, stationed on the Belgian frontier.

The German offensive quickly overwhelmed Dutch forces, and the bombing of Rotterdam persuaded the Netherlands to surrender on 15 May. And although German forces in the north encountered strong French and Belgian resistance, the main German thrust through the Ardennes met with tremendous success. French second-rate divisions in the area were not prepared or equipped to deal with the major armoured thrust that developed (the forest and poor roads were thought to make this impossible), and were hammered by incessant attacks by German bombers.

Just four days into the invasion German troops crossed the Meuse river, and had broken through the French lines. Attempts by the Allies to launch counterattacks by air and land either failed with heavy losses, or were thwarted by the pace of events. The British Expeditionary Force, along with the best units of the French army, were still in the north and had seen little fighting. But the German breakthrough to the south now forced them into rapid retreat to avoid being cut off with their backs to the sea. On 20 May German tanks reached Amiens and effectively trapped the British, who now made for Dunkirk and an unlikely attempt at evacuation to England.

In these desperate circumstances, an evacuation plan known as 'Operation Dynamo' was hastily prepared in Dover by Vice Admiral Bertram Ramsay. His strategy included an appeal for all civilian vessels that could cross the Channel to help ferry the troops from the beaches to larger ships offshore, or to evacuate them entirely. Between 26 May and 4 June - a period during which Hitler halted the advance of his troops on Dunkirk - 200,000 British and 140,000 French troops were evacuated to England. Nine allied destroyers and approximately 200 civilian vessels were lost during the evacuation, and the RAF suffered severe casualties covering the operation from the air.

On 5 June, the Germans swung southwards and French resistance finally collapsed, although not without heavy fighting. On 10 June, Italy opportunistically entered the war on Germany's side. Four days later, the French capital fell, provoking the flight of the French Government to Bordeaux. The Government capitulated on 25 June, just seven weeks after the beginning of the invasion.

The British 51st Highland Division - stationed in the Maginot Line when the fighting started – was forced to surrender at St Valéry. During the final evacuation of British troops from St Nazaire on the Atlantic coast, the troopship Lancastria was sunk with the loss of around 4,000 refugees, British troops and crew. Reluctant to take the risk that the French Navy would end up under German control, Churchill ordered the Royal Navy to present French warships at Mers-el-Kebir with an ultimatum to sail to Britain or to a neutral port for internment. When this offer was rejected on 3 July, British ships bombarded the fleet, killing 1,600 people. Although this operation did much to assure America of the strength of the British purpose, it and the evacuation of Dunkirk did immeasurable damage to Franco-British wartime relations.

Did you know?

Ironically, Germany's Blitzkrieg tactics were based partly on the theories of Charles de Gaulle, French General and expert in the concentration of armour and air planes. De Gaulle was a grand symbol of French antifascism he became President in 1945.


A Brief History of the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research

During the 1902 annual meeting of the American Pharmaceutical Association, Harvey Wiley, the Chief Chemist of the Bureau of Chemistry, announced the formation of a Drug Laboratory within his organization. Wiley intended the Laboratory to assist with standardizing pharmaceuticals and unifying analytical results.

One of the nominees to lead this function was Lyman Frederic Kebler, the Chief Chemist at Smith Kline and French and a recognized expert in the detection of drug adulteration. Appointed Director of the Drug Laboratory in November 1902, he assumed the duties in March 1903.

Early Drug Laboratory Work Under Dir. Lyman Kebler(One of the covers Collier's used in its campaign for the Pure Food and Drugs Act of 1906)

Initially, the Drug Laboratory worked on a variety of projects. One of the first was an investigation of the reagents used by the Bureau, which Kebler soon learned were not completely pure. The Laboratory spent much of its time in search of methods to improve pharmaceutical analyses. Kebler also alerted the public to problems with the drug supply in general.

1906 Act and the Drug Laboratory Becomes the Drug Division in 1908(Carl Alsberg, Chief Chemist, Bureau of Chemistry)

Three years later, behind the long-time lobbying of Wiley, the Pure Food and Drugs Act became law this prohibited interstate commerce of mislabeled and adulterated drugs and food. Wiley himself emphasized food-related issues as a greater health concern, but he gave some attention to patent medicines and prescription drugs his successor, Carl Alsberg, elevated the importance of drug matters. By 1908 the Drug Laboratory underwent its first of what would be many major reorganizations. Renamed the Drug Division, it was divided into four laboratories: the Drug Inspection Laboratory, directed by George Hoover the Synthetic Products Laboratory which W.O. Emery headed the Essential Oils Laboratory, under E.K. Nelson and the Pharmacological Laboratory, directed by William Salant. Kebler remained the Division Director.

The Four Laboratories of the Drug Division(Drug Division, Essential Oils Laboratory)

The main focus of the Essential Oils Laboratory was the analysis of oils used therapeutically either alone or in combination with other chemicals, such as root-beer extract and oil of wintergreen. The Synthetic Products Laboratory was responsible for examinations of synthetic remedies, including the popular headache mixtures, and active ingredients in crude drug products.

(Radol was exposed as a hoax in 1908. The makers of this nostrum tried to cash in on people's fascination with radioactivity.)

The Pharmacological Laboratory investigated the physiological effects of drugs on animals. Most of their early efforts centered on caffeine, a subject of great interest to Wiley. Finally, the Drug Inspection Laboratory was the principal enforcement arm of the Division. For example, from 1909-1910 this Laboratory scrutinized over 900 domestic drug samples, around 1000 imported drugs, and recommended prosecution of 115 samples.

False Therapeutic Claims and the Sherley Amendment(Representative Swagar Sherley was a Representative from Kentucky and Chairman of the House Committee on Appropriations.)

One of the first major challenges to drug regulation under the 1906 Act came in 1910. The Bureau had seized a large quantity of "Johnson's Mild Combination Treatment for Cancer," a worthless product that bore false therapeutic claims on its label. When the case came to trial, the judge determined that claims made for effectiveness were not within the scope of the Pure Food and Drugs Act, and ruled against the government. In 1912, Congress issued corrective legislation. The Sherley Amendment brought therapeutic claims within the jurisdiction of the Pure Food and Drugs Act, but required the Bureau to prove those claims to be false and fraudulent before they would be judged as illegal.

Work of the Drug Inspection Lab(Bureau analysts received their samples from field inspectors such as John Earnshaw, pictured here in an extract packing plant in 1910.)

By this time, the scope of the Drug Inspection Laboratory's work had grown. For example, they investigated methodologies for the determination of morphine, nitroglycerin, and other drugs in combination preparations. Also, the Laboratory collaborated with the U.S. Pharmacopeia (USP) in a study of drug standards. The work of the Division of Drugs was not limited to domestic drug problems. They also studied imported drugs and chemicals and imported products of dubious therapeutic value. The Division also spent considerable time on an investigation of contaminated chloroform. Several manufacturers had been distributing chloroform in tin containers, which was prone to decompose into a substandard product compared to USP chloroform stored in glass.

Pharmacognosy Lab & Sherley Cases Unit

Though the 1906 Act led many patent medicines to abandon narcotics rather than label them, it was less successful in corralling exaggerated claims. In the mid-1910s, the Division of Drugs added two new components. The Pharmacognosy Laboratory was created in 1914. In addition to investigating crude drug products, this Laboratory studied improvements in crude drug processing to reduce waste. In 1916 the Division established a unit to investigate false and fraudulent labeling of drugs. This effort stemmed directly from the Sherley Amendment and was directed by M.W. Glover, a physician on detail from the U. S. Public Health Service (USPHS).

Offices of Drug Admin., Special Collab. Investigations(Lyman Kebler in the laboratory, circa 1922)

The Bureau of Chemistry created the independent Office of Drug Administration in the early 1920s, headed by Glover, to assist the Division of Drugs with issues specific to drug labeling. In March 1923 Glover was recalled to the USPHS and the Office was abolished. At the same time, Kebler became head of the autonomous Office of Special Collaborative Investigations, which worked on mail fraud issues with the Post Office Department, and the Division of Drugs was reorganized.

Div of Drugs to Office of Drug Control George Hoover new Director(George Hoover (38) in a group shot, May, 1923)

In 1923, the Office of Drug Control replaced both the Office of Drug Administration and the Division of Drugs. Directed by George Hoover and organized in parallel with the new Office of Food Control, the Office was responsible for all work in the control of drugs, including crude drugs, manufactured drug ingredients, drug preparations, and patent medicines.

Collaborative Work of the Office of Drug Control(Some of the official reference standards that the FDA's predecessors provided)

The Office continued to collaborate with outside concerns, including trade associations and the USP. The desire for increased manufacturing accuracy led to the formation of contact committees within the associations. After the committees completed studies on ways to improve accuracy, recommendations on implementation were published in the trade journals. In 1926 the Bureau's cooperation with the USP grew even greater through a program to provide standardized product samples of bioassayed drugs, such as digitalis, to be used as reference standards. This program continued until 1930.

Investigations of Safety of Anesthetics Lab of Drug Analysis(A pharmaceutical manufacturer's control room around the early 1940s)

After receiving reports of several deaths relating to impure anesthetics, the Office launched an investigation into the cause. There were several anesthetics on the market at the time, but this investigation focused on ether and ethylene. This was broadened over the years and continued into the mid-1930s. By the conclusion of the investigation, the Office determined that the decomposition of anesthetics was a result of poor manufacturing practices. As part of this inquiry, the Office established a Laboratory dedicated to drug analysis.

James Durrett, Office of Drug Control, and Organization by 1928(James J. Durrett, M.D., Ph.G., Chief, Drug Control 1928-1931)

Beginning in 1928, the drug regulatory staff within the Food, Drug and Insecticide Administration (as the agency was known then) underwent several important personnel changes. George Hoover left the agency after directing the Office of Drug Control for five years and Lyman Kebler resigned as Director of Special Collaborative Investigations. As a result, Special Collaborative Investigations became a unit in the Office of Drug Control, which by this time also contained a Chemical Unit, a Medical Unit, a Veterinary Unit, and a Pharmacology Unit. The new Director of Drug Control was James J. Durrett, like Kebler a physician and pharmacist Durrett was a professor of public health at the University of Tennessee at the time he joined FDIA.

Marvin Thompson and Ergot Research in Pharmacology Lab(FDA's Pharmacological Laboratory)

A highlight in the Office's research was a study of ergot pharmacology conducted by Marvin R. Thompson. Initially, the Office had been concerned about decomposition of crude ergot analysis had shown that this typically occurred during shipping. But the lack of knowledge of the pharmacology of ergot became obvious during this investigation. This led to the beginning of Thompson's work. In 1929 his paper was awarded the Ebert Prize of the American Pharmaceutical Association, bestowed annually for exceptional work in pharmacology. Thompson's paper was groundbreaking in many areas. He proposed modifications in the methods for assaying ergot, and showed that the USP standard for ergot could be improved by changing the preparation techniques.

Frederick Cullen, Office Drug Control, and 1930s Studies of Dinitrophenol

Shortcomings in the Pure Food and Drugs Act had been obvious since it became law. One weakness was the lack of authority to stop distribution of dangerous preparations claiming to reduce weight. In 1934 the Office of Drug Control, headed since 1931 by physician Frederick J. Cullen, began investigations on products containing dinitrophenol. This was a component in diet preparations that increased metabolic rate to dangerous levels, and it was responsible for many deaths and injuries. Since the law did not mandate drug safety, the Office of Drug Control could not seize the products, and was limited to posting warnings.

Drug Div. Redux Pharmacology Established as Independent Office for Drug and Food Work(FDA pharmacologist James C. Munch dictates results of an animal toxicity test)

In 1935 James J. Durrett returned to the Food and Drug Administration to direct the drug regulatory function, a function that once again was named the Drug Division. That same year the pharmacology responsibilities, theretofore part of the Division, became a separate, independent office, headed by Erwin E. Nelson. Nelson held the unique position of consultant to the agency while he remained on the faculty at Michigan from 1919-1937 and chair of the Pharmacology department of Tulane from 1937-1943. The main reason for the separation was to accommodate the increasing pharmacology needs of the food industry, especially in investigations of the effects of poisons and impurities in foods.

1937 Elixir Sulfanilamide Disaster

Continuing problems with dangerous drugs that fell outside the parameters of the Pure Food and Drugs Act finally received national attention with the Elixir Sulfanilamide disaster in 1937. Massengill distributed this preparation without testing for safety (which was not required by law). Because it contained diethylene glycol as a vehicle, a chemical analogue of antifreeze, over 100 people died, many of whom were children.

1938 Act and Requirements for Premarket Drug Safety and New Labeling

In June 1938 President Roosevelt signed the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act into law. Among other things, this law required new drugs to be tested for safety before marketing, the results of which would be submitted to FDA in a new drug application (NDA). The law also required that drugs have adequate labeling for safe use. All drug advertising was assigned to the Federal Trade Commission.

Theodore Klumpp, Drug Division, and Chemical, Collaboration, Medical, & Veterinary Sections(Theodore Klumpp (standing) leads a meeting at FDA. He left FDA in 1941 for the American Medical Association and two years later became the president of Winthrop-Stearns.)

Three months after the President signed the 1938 Act, Theodore Klumpp, who received his medical training at Harvard and served on the faculty at Yale University, assumed leadership of the Drug Division after Durrett resigned. By this time, the Division consisted of a Chemical Section, a Collaboration Section, a Medical Section, and a Veterinary Section, and most of the work focused on reviewing NDAs. Within the first year of this requirement, the Division received over 1200 applications.

New 1940s Authorities: Insulin and Antibiotic Certification and Prescriber Labeling Requirement Antibiotic Testing Established in a New Office

The early 1940s saw three major additions to FDA's responsibilities in the drugs area. The Insulin Amendment, passed in 1941, required all batches of insulin to be tested for purity, strength, quality, and identity before marketing. The testing was conducted by a unit in the Pharmacology Division. Also starting in 1941, the agency required prescriber labeling for all new drugs, in concert with the adequate directions for use provision of the 1938 Act. The Penicillin Amendment was passed in 1945, modeled on the Insulin Amendment. The former required batch certification of drugs wholly or partially composed of penicillin. Subsequent amendments extended the certification requirement to other antibiotics. Responsibility for the testing was placed in another separate and independent office, the Division of Penicillin Control and Immunology. Divided into four sections, Penicillin Certification, Immunology, Antiseptics, and Antibiotics, this Division's responsibility extended beyond testing of penicillin. In 1949 the Division was renamed the Division of Antibiotics to reflect the growing scope of functions and antibiotics.

Wartime Penicillin Testing Robert Herwick Heads Drug Div Sections & their Roles

In 1943 FDA began testing penicillin as part of the wartime development program. The first NDAs for this drug (some of which derived from the pictured strain of P. notatum) were approved in September of that year. The Drug Division at this time was under the leadership of a new director, Robert P. Herwick, who came to this position in 1941. He was trained in chemistry, pharmacology, toxicology, medicine, and law. Under Herwick's direction, the Division retained the same sections -- medical, chemical, and veterinary. The medical section was responsible for reviewing the safety and labeling of new drugs, and consulted on court cases. The veterinary section served the same function for animal drugs. The chemical section analyzed medicines and developed analytical methods for use by field chemists

From Drug Division to Bureau of Medicine Chief Medical Officer Stormont Heads Bur.(Drug Inspectors Conference – 1946)

By 1945 the Division Director also served as the Chief Medical Officer of FDA, and soon thereafter the Drug Division was renamed the Division of Medicine. Herwick resigned in 1947 and was succeeded by Robert Stormont. Stormont was trained in pharmacology and medicine, and had served in the Naval Medical Corps before joining the FDA in 1946.

New Drug Section, Erwin Nelson, and Ralph Smith 1951 Durham-Humphrey Amendment

Erwin E. Nelson (pictured on the left), the pharmacology consultant who directed the New Drug Section beginning in 1947, was promoted to Medical Director after Stormont's departure. Ralph Smith became the Chief of the New Drug Section after Nelson moved up, a position Smith held until the mid-1960s. Both an M.D. and Ph.D., Smith came to the FDA from the Tulane University School of Medicine, where he served as chairman of the Pharmacology Department. Under Smith's leadership, the agency approved over 7,000 New Drug Applications. Soon after the ascendancy of Nelson and Smith, Congress passed another law with a significant impact on drug regulation. The Durham-Humphrey Amendment of 1951 clarified the vague line between prescription and nonprescription drugs theretofore under the law. The Amendment specifically stated that dangerous drugs, defined by several parameters, could not be dispensed without a prescription, witnessed by the prescription legend: "Caution: Federal law prohibits dispensing without prescription."

Chloramphenicol and Adverse Event Reporting Program

The emergence of fatal blood dyscrasias associated with chloramphenicol in the early 1950s led to the search for better adverse reaction reporting. Drug regulation farther down in the distribution system came under scrutiny in 1955, when FDA undertook a pilot study of adverse drug reaction reporting. In cooperation with the American Society of Hospital Pharmacists, the American Medical Association, and others, the study focused on reactions reported by hospitals and pharmacists. Adverse reaction reporting at this time was voluntary and reports normally were scarce. This study blossomed into a more ambitious effort in 1957, a large-scale system for voluntary reporting to assist with post-marketing evaluation of new drugs. By 1963 the study had evolved into a voluntary reporting system with almost 200 participating hospitals.

The Sweeping 1955 Citizens Advisory Committee Report

The Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare formed the Citizens Advisory Committee in 1955 to review practices of the FDA and make recommendations to improve resource utilization. The 14-member Committee, consisting of leaders of industry as well as consumers, was chaired by G. Cullen Thomas of General Mills. Their report of June 1955 contained over 100 recommendations, including over two dozen regarding drugs specifically. Most of the drug recommendations dealt with the NDA program, especially suggestions for accelerating the review program. In general, the Committee recommended that the staff at FDA be increased at least threefold, and the budget as much as fourfold.

Interdicting Illegal Sales of Dangerous Drugs Post-CAC Report Reorg Holland Heads Bur.

The biggest drug enforcement problem at this time was the illegal distribution of barbiturates and amphetamines. FDA responded by training drug inspectors in undercover techniques (one such cadre is pictured). As a result of the recommendations of the 1955 Citizens Advisory Committee, the Division of Medicine underwent a major reorganization and became the Bureau of Medicine in 1957. By this time the Bureau was under Albert Holland, formerly of the New York University College of Medicine and Armour Laboratories, where he had been medical director. Holland had been appointed Medical Director in March 1954, following the resignation of Nelson in 1952.

In-House Research Publications Five Branches of the Bur. Kessenich Arrives

Included on these shelves of the Bureau of Chemistry around 1910 were the Bulletins and Circulars in which bureau scientists published much of their research.

In 1959 the Bureau began an internal publication, Bureau By-Lines, that fostered communication between the headquarters and field laboratories. Bureau By-Lines continued until 1982. At the end of the 1950s, the Bureau of Medicine consisted of five branches, the New Drug Branch, the Drug and Device Branch, the Veterinary Medicine Branch, the Medical Antibiotics Branch, and the Research and Reference Branch. The new medical director, William Kessenich, came to FDA in 1959 from the Department of Internal Medicine at Georgetown University.

Sen. Estes Kefauver Investigates Pharmaceutical Industry(Drug plant inspector (right) checks the working drug formula against the master formula)

Strengthening the drug provisions of the 1938 Act were the focus of Senate hearings held beginning in 1959. These hearings, chaired by Senator Estes Kefauver of the Subcommittee on Antitrust and Monopoly of the Committee on the Judiciary, resulted in a bill introduced in 1961 that would require changes in drug patents, drug efficacy, greater oversight of drug studies, greater FDA access to company records, manufacturing controls, and other measures.

Frances Kelsey, Thalidomide, and a Global Disaster Narrowly Averted Here(Kelsey receiving the award from President John F. Kennedy in 1962)

During the Kefauver hearings, FDA received an NDA for Kevadon, the brand of thalidomide that the William Merrell Company expected to market in the U.S., as it was already well established around the world. Despite ongoing pressure from the firm, medical officer Frances Kelsey refused to allow the NDA to become effective because of insufficient safety data. By late 1961 thalidomide's horrifying effects on newborns became known. Even though Kevadon was never approved for marketing, Merrell had distributed over two million tablets for investigational use, use which the law and regulations left mostly unchecked. Once thalidomide's deleterious effects became known, the agency moved quickly to recover the supply from physicians, pharmacists, and patients. For her efforts, Kelsey received the President's Distinguished Federal Civilian Service Award in 1962, the highest civilian honor available to government employees.

1962 Kefauver-Harris Drug Amendments

As a result of the narrowly avoided tragedy from thalidomide, Senator Estes Kefauver (5th from right above) re-introduced his bill. On October 10 President Kennedy signed the Drug Amendments of 1962, also known as the Kefauver-Harris Amendments. These Amendments required drug manufacturers to prove to the FDA that their products were both safe and effective prior to marketing. They also required that all antibiotics be certified, and gave FDA control over prescription drug advertising. With the new law, the review of antibiotic NDAs was transferred from the Division of New Drugs to the Division of Antibiotics. In May 1961, the designation "Division" replaced "Branch."

1962 Amendments & Clinical Trials the First Advisory Committee(Walter Modell)

The Drug Amendments also addressed the use of drugs in clinical trials, including a requirement of informed consent by subjects. FDA had to be provided with full details of the clinical investigations, including drug distribution, and the clinical studies had to be based on previous animal investigations to assure safety. FDA formed the first advisory committee, the Advisory Committee on Investigational New Drugs, for assistance in implementing the new law. The Committee, chaired by Walter Modell of Cornell University, served as a de facto interface between FDA and clinical investigators and other scientists around the country.

Post-1962 Reorganization of the Div of New Drugs

In the wake of the new law, the Division of New Drugs was restructured into five branches in 1962. The Investigational Drug Branch, directed by Kelsey, evaluated proposed clinical trials for compliance with investigational drug regulations. Earl Meyers, who began his career with FDA in 1939, was the director of the Controls Evaluation Branch, which reviewed the manufacturing controls proposed by drugs makers. The Medical Evaluation Branch assessed safety and efficacy data in NDAs. The New Drug Status Branch, under John Palmer, consulted with manufacturers about their NDAs and proposed dosing schedules for new products. The last branch, New Drug Surveillance, evaluated adverse reaction reports. Ralph Smith remained Division director, though he also served as acting Medical Director from the time Kessenich departed (1962) until March 1964, when Joseph Sadusk (pictured here) was appointed to that position. Sadusk chaired the Department of Preventive Medicine and Community Health at George Washington University before he joined FDA. Under Sadusk, the Bureau of Medicine consisted of four Divisions: Medical Review, directed by Howard Weinstein, New Drugs, directed by Smith, Research and Reference, under George Saiger, and Veterinary Medical, which was headed by Charles Durbin.

Reorganization of Scientific Functions in the 1960s Antibiotics Returns to New Drugs(Robert Roe (second from right, standing) and Daniel Banes (far right, standing) are pictured here at a 1961 joint conference between the FDA and the Food Law Institute)

Bureau of Scientific Standards and Evaluation and the Bureau of Scientific Research also had drug responsibilities. These Bureaus replaced the Bureau of Biological and Physical Sciences in 1964. The Bureau of Scientific Research was in charge of long-term scientific projects, under the direction of Daniel Banes the Division of Pharmacology and the Division of Pharmaceutical Chemistry were located here. The Scientific Standards Bureau, led by Robert Roe, was responsible for decisions on certification and petitions included in this Bureau was the Division of Antibiotics and Insulin Certification. In 1964 responsibility for antibiotics was shifted back to the Division of New Drugs in the Bureau of Medicine to centralize the review of NDAs for all types of human drugs.

1960s Investigations of FDA and Drug Safety by Rep. Fountain(Rep. Fountain on a visit to Research Triangle Park, NC)

Uncertainty about the safety of America's drug supply continued after the passage of the Kefauver-Harris Amendments. As a result, Congress opened hearings in March 1964, chaired by Representative L.H. Fountain, to investigate FDA's efforts to promote drug safety. But Fountain's hearings took a comprehensive look at the agency's regulation of drugs, especially those that were removed from the market.

Drug Efficacy Study Implementation(Among the products that came under intense scrutiny through DESI were preparations with multiple anti-infective ingredients, such as this one)

To further comply with the Drug Amendments of 1962 the FDA contracted in 1966 with the National Academy of Sciences/National Research Council to study drugs approved between 1938 and 1962 from the standpoint of efficacy. The Drug Efficacy Study Implementation (DESI) evaluated over 3000 separate products and over 16,000 therapeutic claims. The last NAS/NRC report was submitted in 1969, but the contract was extended through 1973 to cover ongoing issues. The initial agency review of the NAS/NRC reports by the task force was completed in November 1970. One of the early effects of the DESI study was the development of the Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA). ANDAs were accepted for reviewed products that required changes in existing labeling to be in compliance. In September 1981 final regulatory action had been taken on 90% of all DESI products. By 1984, final action had been completed on 3,443 products of these, 2,225 were found to be effective, 1,051 were found not effective, and 167 were pending.

Over-the-Counter Drug Review(Over-the-counter (OTC) drugs).

In May 1972, FDA applied the principle of a retrospective review to over-the-counter (OTC) drugs. The structure for this OTC review would necessarily be different than that of the prescription drug review, mainly because of the vast array of available OTC products -- hundreds of thousands of different preparations. The OTC review focused on active ingredients, around 1,000 different items, and panels of experts were convened to evaluate these drugs. The agency would publish the results as a series of monographs in the Code of Federal Regulations, specifying the active ingredients, restrictions on formulations, and labeling by therapeutic category.

FDA formed 17 panels, consisting of seven voting members (medical, dental, and scientific experts) and non-voting representatives for industry and consumers. The panels were responsible for arranging the drugs into three categories: safe and effective, unsafe and/or ineffective (which should no longer be marketed), and probably safe and effective but needing further testing to establish significant proof. The review is ongoing. The agency eventually decided that drugs in the last category, like those in the second, would be taken off the market until sufficient proof dictated otherwise.

Bur. of Medicine Reorganization Redux, with Five Divisions(A chemist in the Antibiotic Chemistry Branch uses a transparent "dry box" with built-in rubber gloves).

The Bureau of Medicine's interest in increasing efficiency for clearing new drugs and distributing work among staff members led to yet another restructuring in 1965. The new Bureau consisted of five Divisions and the Office of the Medical Director (still Sadusk). The five Divisions were New Drugs (Smith) Medical Review (Howard Weinstein) Medical Information, formerly the Division of Research and Reference (Donald Levitt) Veterinary Medicine (Charles Durbin) and Antibiotic Drugs (Raymond Barzilai). The Division of Antibiotic Drugs continued to evaluate antibiotic NDAs, but certification of antibiotics remained in the Bureau of Scientific Standards and Evaluation. The Medical Advisory Board also was established at this time to advise FDA on the problems faced by the industry, the medical community, and other health-related areas. Sadusk chaired the Board, and its members included leaders in medicine, pharmacology, dentistry, and veterinary medicine from across the country.

First Outside Commissioner in Modern Times Outside Help for Drug Work Bur of Veterinary Medicine Splits Off(FDA Commissioner James Goddard swears in 65 physicians on 10 July 1966 for various assignments in the Bureau of Medicine including DESI, investigational drug and new drug review, and adverse reaction reporting.)

In 1966, the Bureau of Medicine introduced an Office and Division structure. The Office of New Drugs was responsible for reviewing all aspects of NDAs and investigational new drugs. The Office of Drug Surveillance reviewed adverse drug reaction reports and supplemental drug applications. Finally, the Office of Medical Review was responsible for regulatory actions. This latest reorganization also reflected the establishment of the Bureau of Veterinary Medicine in November 1965. Directed by M. Robert Clarkson, the Bureau was responsible for review of both veterinary drugs and devices. The human device program remained in the Bureau of Medicine until 1971. Sadusk resigned after overseeing the reorganization. Herbert Ley, who had been at both Harvard Medical School and George Washington University, succeeded Sadusk in September 1966. In 1967 the Bureau of Medicine replaced the Office of Drug Surveillance with the Office of Marketed Drugs, which was responsible for approval of supplemental applications. In addition, the Bureau established the Office of Medical Support to centralize a variety of functions in the Bureau, such as medical advertising and adverse reaction reporting.

1969 Malek Report and Bur of Drugs and Other New Bureaus(An inspector checks ampules for extraneous matter on a plant's inspection line.)

In 1969 FDA proposed the first major GMP revisions since 1963. In December 1969, a Departmental study known as the Malek Report recommended a major reorganization of FDA along products lines. Indeed, the Bureaus of Compliance, Medicine, and Science soon were replaced by the Bureau of Drugs and the Bureau of Foods, Pesticides and Product Safety. To form the Bureau of Drugs, the drug and device activities of the Bureau of Medicine were combined with the pharmaceutical science responsibilities of the Bureau of Science and the drug and device compliance activities from the Associate Commissioner for Science. The new Bureau of Drugs consisted of four Offices: New Drugs, Marketed Drugs, Compliance, and Pharmaceutical Sciences.

National Center for Drug Analysis Richard Crout heads Bur of Drugs 7-Office Reorganization, 1974(Summary of early work at the National Center for Drug Analysis).

The National Center for Drug Analysis (NCDA) opened in St. Louis, Missouri, in July 1967 to conduct large scale tests of drug products. Prior to this, NCDA was part of the Division of Pharmaceutical Sciences in the Bureau of Science (formed in 1966 after the Bureau of Scientific Standards and Evaluation merged with the Bureau of Scientific Research). In its first year, the NCDA examined over 7,000 samples. From 1973 until 1981, the Bureau was under the direction of J. Richard Crout. Crout, a pharmacologist at Michigan State, came to the attention of Henry Simmons (1970-1973), Crout's predecessor, while serving on the Ad Hoc Science Advisory Committee (Ritts Committee). The latter investigated the place of science within FDA. Following a 1973 management study of the overall drug function, the Bureau of Drugs reorganized in November 1974 into seven offices: Planning and Evaluation, Compliance, Information Systems, Biometrics and Epidemiology, Pharmaceutical Research and Testing, Drug Monographs, and New Drug Evaluation.

Communicating Drug Information to Health Professionals

During the early 1970s, the FDA started two new forums to increase drug communication with the public. The Bureau of Drugs launched the FDA Drug Bulletin in 1971. The Bulletin alerted physicians and pharmacists to changes in drug use and labeling requirements. The National Drug Experience Reporting System also began in 1971. The NAS had been studying the problem of not only how to catalogue and store information about adverse drug reactions, drug abuse, and drug interactions, but also how that information could be made available to health professionals. The study concluded that since FDA had already collected the data, they should take the lead on creating and maintaining the system.

Sweeping Attempt at Drug Regulation Reform in 1970s Fails(HEW Secretary Joseph A. Califano).

A renewed push for changes in drug regulation began at the highest level of the Department. HEW Secretary Joseph Califano felt that, for such changes to be effective, they had to be made through legislation rather than administrative policy. The initial bill, introduced in Congress on March 17, 1978, was titled the Drug Regulation Reform Act.

It contained nine main provisions: to increase consumer protection, encourage drug innovation, increase consumer information, protect patient rights, improve FDA enforcement, promote competition and cost savings through generic drugs, increase FDA's public accountability, make additional drugs available, and encourage research and training. The effort during 1978 was unsuccessful, but the bill was reintroduced the following year. The Senate approved the bill in September 1979, but the House did not take action and the measure died.

Early Efforts to Mandate Patient Package Inserts

However, efforts to promote one of the provisions in the Senate-approved version of the Drug Regulation Reform Act, the requirement for drug manufacturers to provide package inserts for all prescription products, continued after the reform bill. Since 1970 the FDA had required the inserts only for isoproterenol inhalers and oral contraceptives. In July 1979 FDA proposed a program to provide patients with additional information about their prescription drugs, including a description of the drug's uses, risks, and side effects. Under the proposal, the manufacturer would print the information and the provider (pharmacist, doctor, nurse, etc.) would give the insert to the patient. But by September 1980, under the weight of well-organized opposition to the program, FDA dropped the insert project.

Provisioning Emergency Drugs at Three Mile Island 1980s Reorganizations

In March 1979 FDA suspended both labeling and manufacturing requirements for emergency production of potassium iodide, intended for those in the vicinity of the Three Mile Island nuclear emergency. During the early 1980s the Bureau of Drugs underwent several substantial organizational changes, ranging from discrete changes in branch substructures to a revamping of the entire organization. Among the less ambitious alterations, the Bureau restructured the Division of Drug Information Resources in the fall of 1980, and the Prescription Drug Labeling Staff was transferred from the Office of the Division Director to the Division of Drug Advertising the following year. In March 1982 several Divisions changed names (and, to varying extents, responsibilities): the Division of Product Quality became the Division of Drug Quality Evaluation, the Division of Drug Manufacturing changed to the Division of Drug Quality Compliance, and the Division of Drug Advertising became the Division of Drug Advertising and Labeling.

The Merger of Drug and Biologics, 1982

The biggest organizational change during this time was the merger of the Bureau of Drugs and the Bureau of Biologics to form the National Center for Drugs and Biologics (NCDB) mandated in 1982 and effected the following year. The new Director of the NCDB, Harry Meyer, Jr., had been head of the Bureau of Biologics. Biologics control originated in 1902 in the Hygienic Laboratory, precursor of the National Institutes of Health in 1972 this responsibility was transferred to FDA. The purpose of this reorganization was to streamline FDA's approval procedures in drugs and biologics and to increase the public's assurance of the safety and effectiveness of the drug supply.

Organization of the National Center of Drugs and Biologics

The NCDB consisted of five offices: New Drug Evaluation, Drugs, Biologics, Management, and Scientific Advisors and Consultants. The Office of New Drug Evaluation, directed by Robert Temple, was formed from the six Divisions in the Bureau of Drugs that reviewed NDAs. Jerome Halperin was the first Director of the Office of Drugs, which included the remaining Divisions from the Bureau of Drugs that conducted research and developed standards for the safety and effectiveness of drugs. The Office of Biologics, under John Petricciani, managed the Divisions from the Bureau of Biologics. Administrative functions were in the Office of Management, which Russell Abbott headed. The establishment of the Office of Scientific Advisors and Consultants, directed by Morris Schaeffer, facilitated scientific proficiency and research in drugs and biologics. Finally, the reorganization abolished the National Center for Antibiotics Analysis. Formed in 1968 from the old Division of Antibiotics and Insulin, the Center had been responsible for certification and testing of antibiotics. In 1981 the FDA proposed to phase out the certification program by late 1982, and the program ended on October 1, 1982.

National Center for Drugs and Biologics Offices, mid-1980s(Commissioner Frank Young, appointed in 1984, faced the wrath of AIDS activists in search of both more therapeutic options and a greater voice in the formation of policies affecting AIDS patients.)

In 1984 all of the National Centers within FDA were redesignated simply as centers. At this time, the Center for Drugs and Biologics established or reengineered five offices. The Office of Compliance, directed by Daniel Michels, was made up of the Divisions of Drug Labeling Compliance, Drug Quality Compliance, Drug Quality Evaluation, Scientific Investigations, Biological Product Compliance, and Regulatory Affairs. The Office of Management, still under Abbott, was comprised of the Divisions of Planning and Evaluation, Administrative Management, and Drug Information Resources.

Temple became Director of the Office of Drug Research and Review and led the Divisions of Cardio-Renal Drug Products, Neuropharmacological Drug Products, Oncology and Radiopharmaceutical Drug Products, Surgical-Dental Drug Products, Drug Biology, Drug Chemistry, and Drug Analysis. Peter Rheinstein headed the Office of Drug Standards, which consisted of the Divisions of OTC Drug Evaluation, Biopharmaceutics, Generic Drugs, and Drug Advertising and Labeling. The Office of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, under Gerald Faich, was made up of the Division of Biometrics and the Division of Drug Experience. Finally, Elaine Esber led the Office of Biologics Research and Review.

Orphan Drug Act and Federal Anti-Tampering Act(Hemin was one of the first two orphan drugs recognized under the 1983 Act.)

Drug responsibilities increased in several ways in the mid-1980s. The Orphan Drug Act of 1983 employed several means to promote development of products for rare diseases. Among the provisions of this law, the sponsors of drug candidates could petition the agency for assistance in planning animal and clinical protocols. Also, the sponsor was allowed seven years of marketing protection, and the law provided a 50 percent tax credit for investigation expenses. As a result of this Act, in early 1983 an Orphan Product Development office was established in the Office of the Commissioner, under Marion Finkel. Also in 1983, Congress passed the Federal Anti-Tampering Act in the wake of the Tylenol poisonings. This law amended the U.S. Code to provide penalties for tampering with or threatening to tamper with any product covered by the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

Regulating Direct-to-Consumer Prescription Drug Ads, 1980s

Advertising in professional journals was a well-accepted practice, where doctors, pharmacists, and other health professionals could read information on side effects and other disclosure data adjacent to the promotional information. Direct to consumer television advertising of prescription drugs emerged in May 1983. Boots Pharmaceuticals was the first manufacturer to use this new venue in promoting its Rufen brand of ibuprofen. FDA took action against the advertisement out of concern that consumers would not be able to read the long list of side effects that flashed quickly across the screen. The commercial was replaced with an acceptable version.

Generic Drugs and the 1984 Hatch-Waxman Act

The Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 expedited FDA review of generic versions of brand name drugs without repeating efficacy and safety data. The first Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) approved under this law was for generic disopyramide, marketed as Norpace and used in the treatment of cardiac arrhythmias. As a result of this legislation, several Divisions in the Office of Drug Standards added branches to assist with the review of ANDAs. The law also provided manufacturers with the opportunity to apply for an extra five years of patent protection to make up for time lost during the FDA approval process.

Further 1980s Reorganization in the Drugs Office of NCDB

Several important organizational changes emerged during this period. In 1985, the Drugs and Biologics Fraud Branch was established within the Division of Drug Labeling Compliance to combat health fraud in the drug and biologic areas. That same year, the Division of Drug Chemistry was abolished and its staff reassigned to the Division of Drug Analysis for NDA review. Also, the Division of Drug and Biologic Product Experience was renamed the Division of Epidemiology and Surveillance

Changes in the Office of Compliance & the Office of Consumer and Professional Affairs(Charles Roberts of the Center for Drugs and Biologics examines an AIDS testing kit, which FDA approved in 1985.)

The structure of the Office of Compliance changed in 1986, resulting in five Divisions: Drug Labeling Compliance, Drug Quality Evaluation, Scientific Investigations, Regulatory Affairs, and Manufacturing and Product Quality. The Office of Consumer and Professional Affairs, formed after the merger of the Bureau of Drugs and the Bureau of Biologics, was abolished in 1987. Also in 1987, Paul Parkman became the Director of the Center for Drugs and Biologics, and Gerald Meyer became his deputy.

Accelerating Access to Investigational Drugs, Reporting Adverse Effects

The 1980s witnessed increasing concern for drug regulation by patient advocacy groups, exemplified here by a 1988 protest at the Parklawn Building in Rockville by the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power. Additional laws and policies of the 1980s had an impact on drug approval and distribution. For example, the agency strengthened reporting requirements for adverse reactions in 1985. The new requirements addressed all prescription drugs, including older pharmaceuticals that predated FDA approval. New regulations for investigational drug development also went into effect in 1985. The new rules increased the availability of experimental drugs, including compassionate use of drugs under research for patients with serious and/or life-threatening conditions. In 1988 FDA promulgated treatment IND regulations. These allowed desperately ill patients to receive promising new drugs before full approval had been completed. Congress passed the Prescription Drug Marketing Act in the same year. This law prohibited the purchase, sale, trade, and -- with exceptions -- reimportation of drug samples. It also required drug wholesalers to register with states.

NCDB Divided Back into Drugs and Biologics Centers(Carl Peck, succeeded in 1994 by Janet Woodcock, the first Director of CDER)

On October 6, 1987, the Center for Drugs and Biologics was split into the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research and the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER). This split was necessary because of the increasing volume of NDAs, to provide proper high-level attention to the growing problem of AIDS, and to address other issues in drug and biologic evaluation. Carl Peck became the first Director of CDER, and Parkman was named Director of CBER. Peck, who had been Director of the Department of Clinical Pharmacology at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences when he came to FDA, continued as Director until 1994, when Janet Woodcock became the second Director of CDER. Woodcock, whose background is in internal medicine and rheumatology, had been in CBER before assuming her position in the Center for Drugs.

Initial Organization of CDER(In the Spring of 1988 the Public Health Service sent this pamphlet to over 100 million households in the U.S.)

When CDER began it consisted of six offices: Management (directed by Robert Bell), Compliance (Michels), Drug Standards (Rheinstein), Drug Evaluation I (Temple), Drug Evaluation II (James Bilstad), Epidemiology and Biostatistics (Faich), and Research Resources (Jerome Skelly). The Division of Antiviral Products was established in 1988 within the Office of Drug Evaluation II to assist with review of drugs for AIDS and other indications. The Office of the Center Director added two new staff offices in 1989. The Professional Development Staff developed and coordinated programs to assist with recruiting and training of Center staff, and the Pilot Drug Evaluation Staff fostered new ideas to streamline the drug approval process.

Organization of Generic Drugs and the Generic Drug Crisis in the 1980s

Also at this time, CDER established the Office of Generic Drugs to assume responsibility for review of ANDAs, which had been located in the Office of Drug Standards. In addition, the Generic Drugs Advisory Committee was formed to assist the Office of Generic Drugs with approval issues. This Committee advised the Office on scientific and technical matters related to the safety and effectiveness of generic drugs. In the wake of the convictions of five FDA reviewers for unlawful contacts with regulated industry, Congress passed the Generic Drug Enforcement Act in 1992. This law provided a variety of penalties for illegal acts involved with ANDA approvals.

Outside Evaluation of FDA and Ongoing Reorganization in CDER

In March 1990 HHS Secretary Louis Sullivan appointed a committee, headed by former FDA Commissioner Charles Edwards, to review the agency's mission, structure, priorities, staffing, and budget. One committee member resigned when he was selected by President Bush as the Commissioner-designate: David Kessler.

Reorganizations in response to scientific and legislative mandates continued in the 1990s. For example, the Office of Research Resources created the Division of Clinical Pharmacology. This Division, consisting of the Chemotherapy and Analytical Methodology Branch and the Preclinical Development Branch, studied clinical pharmacology and expanded CDER's interests in clinical investigations.

1992 Prescription Drug User Fee Act and Its Impact on Drug Approvals and Review Times

The Prescription Drug User Fee Act, passed in 1992, required drug and biologic manufacturers to pay fees to the FDA for the evaluation of NDAs and supplements. Also, the firms would pay an annual establishment fee and product fees. Congress required FDA to apply user fees to hire more reviewers, and thus expedite the reviews. Following the passage of this legislation, the number of new drug approvals has indeed increased steadily each year, from 63 in 1991 to a record 131 in 1996. Also, median approval times for new molecular entities and for all NDAs have been cut in half from 1993 to 1998 from about two years to twelve months for both categories.

Major Organizational Transformation of CDER in mid-1990s

Advisory committees have been an important element in drug review since the 1960s. Pictured here is a meeting of the Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee. Recently CDER underwent a Center-wide reorganization, beginning in 1995. Within the Office of Drug Evaluation I (ODE I) the Division of Oncology and Pulmonary Drug Products was split into separate Divisions the Division of Oncology Drug Products stayed in ODE I and the Division of Pulmonary Drug Products moved into ODE II. Also, nine new Offices were established and the functions of one were moved. Included in the new Offices were three additional Offices of Drug Evaluation, an Office of Training and Communication, the Office of Review Management, the Office of Pharmaceutical Science, the Office of New Drug Chemistry, the Office of Clinical Pharmacology and Biopharmaceutics, and the Office of Testing and Research. The functions of the Office of Over-the-Counter Drug Evaluation were transferred to ODE V.

CDER at the Dawn of the 21st Century

Through the years, responsibilities within FDA for drug regulation have undergone major changes. Most of these came as a result of innovations in drug development and additions to legislative authority. When Lyman Kebler was hired in 1902, he was basically a one-man bureau who had corrupt reagents and half a desk to fight the most egregious offenses of a largely unregulated industry. As of 1994, CDER was the largest headquarters component of FDA, consisting of almost 1500 men and women working in several buildings. The complexity and challenges of drug review are multiplying as the sophistication of drug design and manufacturing increases, which speaks to the importance of maintaining a well-trained and adequately supported group of agency drug officials, for the good of the public health.


Bones Discovered in 1940 Could Have Been Amelia Earhart’s

A new forensic analysis suggests that skeletal remains found on a remote island belonged to the famous pilot.

A new forensic analysis suggests that bones found on the Pacific island of Nikumaroro in 1940—and subsequently lost—could very well have been those of Amelia Earhart.

On July 2, 1937, on the third-to-last leg of their attempt to circumnavigate the globe, Earhart and her navigator, Fred Noonan, were aiming for Howland Island just north of the equator. After taking off from Lae, New Guinea, they failed to locate Howland and vanished.

Three years later, and 350 nautical miles southwest of Howland, a British official in Nikumaroro discovered 13 bones buried near the remains of a campfire on the island. The bones were shipped to Fiji, where two doctors examined them. One thought they came from an elderly Polynesian male the other, David Hoodless, postulated that they belonged to a European male.

The bones have since disappeared, but Hoodless’s seven measurements survived—four of the skull and three long bone lengths (humerus, radius, and tibia).

Richard Jantz, a forensic anthropologist at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, recently analyzed those measurements as well as Earhart’s body dimensions as indicated by photographs and articles of clothing. The evidence, he says, “strongly supports the conclusion that the Nikumaroro bones belonged to Amelia Earhart.”

At the very least, Jantz argues, the possibility can’t be excluded. The measurements are consistent with her known height, the skull could be female, and the bone lengths are close to what he estimates hers were. “If the bones do not belong to Amelia Earhart,” he writes in Forensic Anthropology, “then they are from someone very similar to her.”

These bones are not the only evidence placing Earhart on Nikumaroro Island. The International Group for Historic Aircraft Recovery (TIGHAR) has long been investigating the hypothesis that Earhart and Noonan landed their Lockheed Electra 10E there when they couldn’t find Howland.

The researchers base their hypothesis on Earhart’s last radio transmissions. At 8:43 a.m. on July 2, Earhart radioed the Itasca, the U.S. Coast Guard cutter awaiting Earhart at Howland: "KHAQQ [the Electra's call letters] to Itasca. We are on the line 157 337." The Itasca received the transmission but couldn't get any bearings on the signal.

The “line 157 337” indicates that the plane was flying on a northwest to southeast navigational line that bisected Howland Island. If Earhart and Noonan missed Howland, they would fly either northwest or southeast on the line to find it. To the northwest of Howland lies open ocean for thousands of miles to the southwest is Nikumaroro.

Later in 1937, a British party explored the island with the intent of colonizing it. Eric Bevington, a colonial officer, noticed what looked like an “overnight bivouac.” He also took a photograph of the shoreline, which includes an unidentified object that TIGHAR speculates might be a plane’s landing gear.

By 1938 the island was colonized as part of the Phoenix Islands Settlement Scheme, one of the British Empire’s last expansions. Colonists reported finding airplane parts, some of which could have plausibly come from the Electra.

TIGHAR has launched 12 expeditions to Nikumaroro since 1989. Over the course of those visits to the island, they’ve identified a site that matches the description of where the bones were found.

At the Seven Site (the name comes from the shape of the clearing around it) there’s evidence of several campfires, as well as the remains of birds, fish, turtles, and clams, indicating that someone ate there. Based on the way the clams were opened and the fish consumed (the heads weren’t eaten), that someone was probably not a Pacific islander.

Several 1930s-era glass bottles have also been discovered at the site. One of them may even have contained freckle cream, a cosmetic Earhart was likely to have used.

Last summer, four human remains detection dogs from the Institute for Canine Forensics brought to the island “alerted” on the Seven Site, signaling that someone had died there. No additional bones were discovered in a subsequent excavation but soil from the site is currently undergoing DNA analysis.


New Society – New Innovative 1920’s Fashions

Society also began to accept changes in fashion which took it right away from any Edwardian dictums. It was in total relaxed contrast to the styles twenty years previously. Fashion of the 1920s is not so very different from dress styles worn in the later 20 th century. One of the great society events of this era was the 1924 Paris Olympic games.

Flyer of 1924 Paris Olympic games

Greater mobility, independence, economic changes, mass production of clothing, moving film, new fabrics and a new spirit are the basic reason for the revolutionary changes in dress and manners.


Watch the video: 28η Οκτωβρίου ώρα 5:30 1971 - Το τέλος. (January 2022).