A review of the present state of uterine pathology / by James Henry Bennet.

  • Bennet, James Henry, 1816-1891.
Date:
1856
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: A review of the present state of uterine pathology / by James Henry Bennet. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    36/152 (page 24)
    scientious and accurate an observer as Dr. West to differ entirely with me, and with those who adopt the same views as myself, as to the pathological importance of the lesions we both recognise. The key to Dr. West's lectures, the explanation of the frame of mind under the influence of which his researches were carried out, and the resume of the results to which they have led him, are to be found in a paragraph at the foot of page 14, which runs as follows :— The really important question is, whether ulceration of the os uteri is to be regarded as the first in a train of processes which are the direct or indirect occasion of by far the greater number of the ailments of the generative system ; or whether, on the other hand, it is to be considered as a condition of slight pathological importance, and of small semeiological value—a casual concomitant, perhaps, of many disorders of the womb, but of itself giving rise to few symp- toms, and rarely calling for special treatment V The first part of this paragraph may be considered a concise statement of the views Dr. West attributes to his antagonists, of the scien- tific error he thinks he has to encounter. The second part may be considered a concise enunciation of the opinions with which he rises from the investigation. Dr. West wrestles with an imaginary enemy—combats a foe of his own creation. No pathologist, to my knowledge, as I have already stated, at home or abroad, has described ulceration of the os uteri as a morbid entity—as a disease existing per se. On the contrary, all who have written on the subject have spoken of ulceration, and described it as a result of the inflammation which invariably, necessarily, precedes and ac- companies it, and which may exist without it for years, in the uterus as elsewhere. Dr. West has been apparently misled by the discussion to which Dr. Lee's extraordinary assertions gave rise. Dr. Lee, in his anxiety to crush the modern views of uterine pathology, boldly denied the existence of ulceration. He thereby thought to destroy doctrines which announced inflammation and inflammatory lesions as of constant occur- rence, and ulceration as the most frequent secondary lesion of all, and the one that more especially necessitates instrumental