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:
—In response to the statement of Dr. Pike (Correspondence, The Journal, Feb. 19, 1916, p. 591) I beg leave to confine myself to the two points that have been more objectively discussed.With reference to the action of the iodin compound of the thyroid in the animal organism, the belief is expressed that "a misstatement of fact" was made in our commentary. In effect we expressed the opinion that it is superficial reasoning to pass so readily from observed facts about the influence exerted on electrical permeability of cells by sodium iodid, which by dissociation yields iodin ions, to the conclusion that an organic iodin compound, which contains "masked" or undissociable iodin, has the same influence. If there is "a misstatement of fact" in this, it must be about the undissociable iodin. To be brief: There is nothing in Scudder's tables which indicates that the dissociation involves
Woelfel A. The Kinetic Drive. JAMA. 1916;LXVI(9):675. doi:10.1001/jama.1916.02580350063033