The concept of essential hypertension needs clarification. Too much confusion and too many controversial statements are found in the immense literature on the subject. This is not due to insufficient knowledge of facts and analytical data from both clinic and laboratory, but rather to lack of satisfactory synthesis which would logically integrate all the facts—not only the personally convenient ones—into a system. What are some of the more important discrepancies concerning the nature of essential hypertension?
1. There are authorities who consider the very term essential hypertension as a confession of ignorance1,2 or as a collective concept for a number of conditions having in common the positive characteristic of arterial hypertension and the negative one of the absence of primary renal disease,1 in other words, as designation of a syndrome rather than of a disease. British investigators recently "suspect that essential hypertension has no real existence as
BAUER J. The Nature of Essential Hypertension. AMA Arch Intern Med. 1957;99(1):47-56. doi:10.1001/archinte.1957.00260010049007