[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 27, 1899


JAMA. 1899;XXXII(21):1182. doi:10.1001/jama.1899.02450480046006

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


Among the many debts the clinician owes to the pathologist and bacteriologist is the means of accurately determining between typhoid and the malarial fevers. Not many years ago the occurrence of frequent chills and rigors in a case thought to be typhoid would, if not entirely change the diagnosis, at least give to the disease that most objectionable appellation, "typho-malaria." The teachings and writings of Osler have done much to dispel this view, but it still unfortunately exists to a very considerable extent. On the other hand, a continued fever, if not typhoid, was not thought malarial in origin, and we are again indebted to Johns Hopkins in the persons of Thayer and Hewetson for interesting observations on the continued malarial fevers. Bacteriology of the past few years has taught us how common it is for infections of two or more pathogenic germs to exist in the same body at

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