This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.
To the Editor.
—The "dialogue" concerning neuro-ophthalmology and medical ophthalmology in the Archives (94:393,1976) has stirred me to write to you. I believe that a few comments are in order from practitioners of "general" ophthalmology.The reason I selected ophthalmology as my specialty 20 years ago was because it was a field that combined the intelligence and crossword puzzle solving of medicine with the satisfaction of working with one's hands in surgery. I have never regretted my choice. I agree with Dr Cogan that an understanding of neuro-ophthalmology requires one to understand medical ophthalmology and that an interest in one serves to stir an interest in the other. As I sit here dictating this letter, I can think of the past month of a busy practice in which I have seen a 4-year-old with ciliary muscle and iris paralysis of one eye, probably induced by an attack of varicella,
Freedman JK. In Defense of General Ophthalmology. Arch Ophthalmol. 1976;94(8):1422. doi:10.1001/archopht.1976.03910040290027