[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.205.176.107. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
November 10, 1962

Staphylococcal Infections-Reply

Author Affiliations

Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn.

JAMA. 1962;182(6):701. doi:10.1001/jama.1962.03050450100027

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

Abstract

To the Editor:—  I appreciate Dr. Trimble's comments and concur with his point of view. The crux of the matter is whether the staphylococcus demonstrated is actually the etiologic agent of the illness. It would have been desirable for me to have prefaced my answer with such a statement before proceeding to discuss the means of eradicating a proven infection.One of my colleagues, Dr. J. H. Geraci, has a particular interest in infectious diseases, and I asked his opinion. He commented as follows: "I have read your answer to the question posed by the M.D. in New Jersey, and I have read the letter from Dr. Trimble. I would agree with Dr. Trimble that the mere presence of staphylococcus in the nose of the allergic child and in the nose and throat of the parents does not constitute staphylococcal infection. If it could be demonstrated, however, that the staphylococcus

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