This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.
The book is based on clinical, roentgenographic and postmortem examination of a group of coal miners. Without giving data on the nature of the coal or dust concentrations, the authors have accepted employment records of work in rock or coal and attempted to differentiate the pulmonary reactions resulting from inhaling the two kinds of dust. They fail to point out, however, that the anthracosilicosis with which they have dealt may be different from that in other industries in which coal dust is not present. They have not been able to classify the roentgenologic appearances according to any of the generally accepted schemes but describe them in the following groups: ill defined diffuse shadows; nodular shadows; unilateral or bilateral dense shadows; pseudo-tumor-like shadows. The picture of linear exaggeration, called in South Africa "more fibrosis than usual" they were not able to identify.
They failed to find the roentgenogram as valuable an
La fibrose pulmonaire des mineurs. JAMA. 1938;111(17):1588. doi:10.1001/jama.1938.02790430072027
Coronavirus Resource Center
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: