[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.205.49.6. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
March 14, 1896

THOUGHTS ON TYPHOID FEVER; ITS ETIOLOGY, PATHOLOGY, ABORTION AND TREATMENT.

Author Affiliations

NEWCASTLE, COLO.

JAMA. 1896;XXVI(11):504-508. doi:10.1001/jama.1896.02430630006002a

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

Prior to the dark ages we find little to indicate that typhoid fever was diagnosed as a distinct form of disease. When the mind of man awoke from the sleep of centuries a new impulse was given to all departments of science, and through the investigations of Spigelius, Sydenham, Huxham, Trousseau, Stoll, Petit, Peyer, Andral, Louis, Chomel, Bretonou and a host of others, we have our knowledge of typhoid or enteric fever, as a specific zymotic disease. Until within a very recent period the concensus of opinion has been that it could not be aborted, but must run a course, and whether only communicated from preexisting cases or occurring spontaneously, are still mooted questions. Virchow says, wherever we find a cell there must have been a cell—it is a concise statement of an almost universal belief, applicable to all forms of life since the monad, the microscopic atom of protoplasm

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