[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
August 1, 1925


Author Affiliations

Burlington, Iowa.

JAMA. 1925;85(5):378. doi:10.1001/jama.1925.02670050062031

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:  —If there was ever such as thing as the "last word," it would seem to have been uttered in the paper on alternating squint, by Goar, and the subsequent discussion at the Atlantic City session (The Journal, July 11). But, since a universal motor aphasia is not within the purview, a few more, if they are to the point, can do no harm. Syllogistically, if the statement is true, as assumed, that alternating squint is not amendable to orthoptic measures, the employment of such measures, before or after operation, as suggested, partakes of the non sequitur conclusion. On the other hand, if orthoptic exercises are profitable after operation it may be error to predicate that they are not all-sufficient—in some cases duly selected, as in monocular squint. A one year time limit is wholly arbitrary. But, whatever may be thought of this academic presentation, the fact that

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