[Skip to Navigation]
Sign In
July 28, 1923


JAMA. 1923;81(4):261-269. doi:10.1001/jama.1923.02650040001001

Articles from the pens of gastro-enterologists who have written most voluminously on this subject admit the difficulty of making a positive diagnosis of gastric ulcer, and they look and long for a test, such as the Wassermann, which will give an accurate diagnosis of gastric ulcer; but they shut their eyes to the roentgen-ray, which, if properly employed, would give them a diagnosis far more accurate than the Wassermann is for syphilis, and would not only give a diagnosis of ulcer per se but would determine the type of ulcer.

The literature is full of articles quoting remarkable percentages of cures of gastric ulcer by some particular "ulcer cure." If no reliable means of accurately diagnosing gastric ulcer exists, what proof is there that one has really cured a gastric ulcer? How does one know that one has not simply relieved a pylorospasm, which is the gastric manifestation of some

Add or change institution