[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
May 14, 1960


J. A. T.
JAMA. 1960;173(2):202. doi:10.1001/jama.1960.03020200074024

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.


To the Editor:—  May I presume upon your precious time to point out a few salient facts? Your excellent section labeled Correspondence has, it seems to me, been overflowing with controversial but often inaccurate letters of late. I am sure it is your wish to interest the reader by drawing him more fully into debatable subjects, yet I fear you do yourself a disservice by printing such epistles as "Breast Cancer" (172:1083 [March 5] 1960). McWhirter, I believe, uses the word "operable" in Haagensen's original sense; i. e., according to his criteria for operability. This is the point. According to Haagensen's criteria many "inoperable" patients had five-year cures. Further, your reader mistakes the purpose of radiation therapy—that is, not to kill all cells but to retard growth and cause walling-off fibrosis, thus limiting their further growth or spread. He therefore asks "Does axillary radiation, then, not cure but merely

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview