No that is a flat out lie, they took a while to accept it
Your source says the scientists accepted it immediately. It was the doctors who didn't.
And why? Because they were making money the old way.
Similar to how deniers reject science for the sake of money..
Your comment proves you didn't read the link, here is what you never read:
"After Warren approached him in 1981 with the bacterium, Marshall generated a list of questions about the organism to guide his subsequent research. In his 1983 letter to Lancet, the first public communication of his findings, Marshall asked about these bacteria, "Why have they not been seen before; are they pathogens or merely commensals in a damaged mucosa?". One speculation for Marshall's ability to understand gastric bacteria as potentially harmful was his young age. Paul Thagard points out that Marshall, who had only started gastroenterology in 1981, "did not require abandonment of a set of well entrenched beliefs that conflicted with the new ideas".
In contrast, other more established medical researchers and practitioners had beliefs about the nature and treatment of ulcers that clashed with the new hypotheses and led them to reject them summarily. Of course, in medical school, Marshall had learned the medically accepted ideas about the nature and treatment of ulcers. Still, Thagard maintains that Marshall's position as a gastroenterologist-in-training allowed him to think more openly about the etiology of peptic ulcer disease.
The discovery of the bacterium
Helicobacter pylori, originally named
Campylobacter pyloridis (
C. pylori), dissolved the medical belief in the stomach's sterility.
However, doctors were reluctant to accept that this bacterium might be harmful. In 1982, the Australian Gastroenterological Society rejected Marshall's study, published in The Lancet 1984 as groundbreaking work. The study showed that that all subjects infected with
H. pylori exhibited gastritis and all subjects with duodenal ulcer were also infected. But because of the rejection, Marshall felt "very depressed about our first failed attempt to present our work on
H. pylori".
As Paul Thagard notes, gastroenterologists were less receptive to the bacterial theory of ulceration than microbiologists. At the Second International Workshop on Campylobacter Infections in Brussels, where Marshall next reported his findings, microbiologists began research projects to find the bacteria while
many gastroenterologists scoffed, calling Marshall's theory "preposterous". Marshall and the international medical community had to generate more evidence before gastroenterologists would admit the relationship between
H. pylori and ulcers.
While gastroenterologists may have held firm beliefs about the impossibility of pathogenic bacteria in the stomach, microbiologists held no such bias. Nevertheless, Marshall felt determined to gain the support of gastroenterologists. As Marshall reflects, "In my naiveté, I expected
H. pylori to be immediately accepted as the cause of duodenal ulcer and gastritis". But for ulcer-sufferers to receive proper therapy, Marshall still had work to do."
and later in the same article you still didn't read:
" Popular accounts now emerge: a special heroe's edition of U.S. News & World Report headlines an article on Marshall with "A Gutsy Gulp Changes Medical Science"; a Bulletin cover article puns "Gut Feeling Brings a Great Discovery"; an editor writes in the first edition of The Journal of Theoretics, "I hope that through this journal, a rational evaluation of new theories may be accomplished in a more thoughtful and less painful process than Dr. Marshall endured". Even with all the media attention, Marshall still felt surprised by the delay. He writes,
"In 1983, when the H. pylori hypothesis was developed, I was certain that it would immediately gain universal acceptance and that within two years peptic ulcer therapy would be essentially an antimicrobial regimen". This was far from the case. A 1986 book on Peptic Ulcer and its Drug Causation lends a page to the bacterial hypothesis, noting, "Whether these bacteria have an aetiological role in peptic ulcer gastritis is unknown". At this time, doctors still prescribed drugs to reduce stomach acidity and monitored patients for complications. "
bolding mine
======
You wrote:
Your source says the scientists accepted it immediately. It was the doctors who didn't.
Now I know why you didn't post the quote about those mythical scientists, because you were just making it up, never having read the link.
Don't you get tired of being caught as a liar?
