[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.204.247.205. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
May 24, 1965

De Nucleis Pulposis

Author Affiliations

San Francisco

JAMA. 1965;192(8):727. doi:10.1001/jama.1965.03080210071031

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:—  In "Closer Look at Spinal Lesions," by Nagel et al, Yale University School of Medicine (JAMA191:975-978 [March 22] 1965) the term "nucleus pulposa" is used consistently. This makes one wonder about the role and the background of the editors—no doubt more than one—at work in this case, and editors in general. Nucleus is neither woman, tree, city, country, nor island. Nearly every one except the authors and editors of this paper (so graphically pointing out the dangers of spinal biopsy) knows, without requiring "closer look" at a dictionary, that nucleus (pulposus) is masculine. Imagine "nucleus rubra" or "nigra" or "caudata"! With hurt surprise do we see this emasculate pulp Latin emanate from Yale. What next? An annulus fibrosa closing in on that once virile nucleus of learning?

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