[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
October 20, 1917


Author Affiliations


JAMA. 1917;LXIX(16):1374-1375. doi:10.1001/jama.1917.02590430068023

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:  —Your editorial of Sept. 22, 1917, p. 1006, on this subject, calling favorable attention to Bateman's article on the raw egg in the American Journal of the Medical Sciences, June, 1917, needs a preliminary reply. Were it not for the stamp of authority of the Sheffield Physiological Laboratory and the consequent serious results that its publication has already caused and likely will further cause, Bateman's flimsy, illogical, unscientific array of semifacts would not be entitled to notice. His conclusion is based on the narrow view that because of the loss of 15 per cent. of available albumin (which is not lost in feeding boiled egg white) the physician should discard the use of the raw egg as "illogical and inadvisable," and that "no advantage accrues." He cites out of but twelve persons observed (?) only one, a child 3 years old, who had diarrhea during the three days

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