Concerning the conduct of medical journals and controversies / by George M. Gould.

  • Gould, George Milbrey, 1848-1922.
Date:
1905
Catalogue details

Licence: In copyright

Credit: Concerning the conduct of medical journals and controversies / by George M. Gould. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.

    4/8 (page 2)
    viously. Thus a second person independently comes to the conclusion of Kaiser as regards dextrocularity. Permit me while upon this subject to thank Dr. Fridenberg for his contribution published in your first number of Ophthal- mology. It was unkind of him to demolish the theory a second time, as he had already done it so thoroughly and urbanely at Atlantic City in one minute after he had first learned of it. He, also, evidently had not read the articles of Kaiser, Majew- sky, and others. *The unfortunate collection of epithets made use of by Dr. Fridenberg and generally allowed publi- cation by Ophthalmology would prevent me from making any reply, even if his logic, excellent of its kind, called for attention. He should not be at such pains to controvert an author whose article and personality he holds in such scorn as to characterize in these terms:—“Such assurance,” “con- fusion,” “cart before the horse” (many times repeated), “queer statements,” wholesome statements,” “evident inaccuracy,” “absurd,” “misstatements,” “unsupp>orted assertions,” “inac- curacies of observation,” “contradictory logic,” “hasty con- clusion,” “dangerously visionary,” fantastic assumption,” “pseu- do-science,” “greater height of absurdity,” “squander. sight,” “grasp at the shadow and lose the substance,” “for the sake of a chimera juggle with a vital function,” “risk incalculable harm,” etc.* One guilty of the scientific, literary, and logical crimes thus implied hardly merits 17 octavo pages of criticism. It is a poor compliment to the readers of Ophthalmology, any one of whom may easily demonstrate the truth and value, sci- entifically and medically, of dextrocularity and sinistrocularity. Respectfully yours. Geo. M. Gould. January, 1905. *The sentences between these stars (*), are those marked as necessary to excise. G. M. G. DR. WUERDEMANn's REPEY. January 30, 1905. Dr. George M. Gould, Philadelphia, Pa. My Dear Doctor: Yours of the 38th, together with letter for publication in Ophthalmology, received. Have also received letter from Dr. Burnett. Both will be published. T must, however, edit your sarcasm. The polemic article