[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
March 1936


Author Affiliations


From the Department of Medicine, University of Buffalo School of Medicine, and the outpatient department of the Buffalo General Hospital.

Arch Intern Med (Chic). 1936;57(3):557-561. doi:10.1001/archinte.1936.00170070082007

Definite progress in the treatment of obesity has been made in recent years. Studies in water balance, a better understanding of the glands of internal secretion and their function, a more intelligent conception of dietary requirements and, finally, the pressure of modern fashion, which sends so many stout women to the physician, have all made important contributions to this progress. Yet, when one attempts to classify many cases of obesity, either on an etiologic or on a clinical basis, confusion and uncertainty remain. As early as 1910 Lyon1 clearly indicated this difficulty, and Jarlov,2 in his exhaustive work, well illustrated the disagreement and difficulties in classification, even when the etiology was entirely disregarded. If etiology is considered, there is even more confusion. The arguments for endogenous obesity versus exogenous obesity are familiar.3 The appetite theory, the relationship of occupation to obesity and the depression of metabolism4

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