[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
Other Articles
March 18, 1939


Author Affiliations

Lake Bluff, Ill.

JAMA. 1939;112(11):1094. doi:10.1001/jama.1939.02800110074023

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 place of the chemist in a clinical laboratory cannot be evaluated either by a busy physician or by a chemist without experience in laboratories. The problems of each laboratory are different.From personal experience I feel that the chemist undervalues the participation of the physician in his laboratory work and that few physicians quite understand the purpose of the chemist. The less participation on the part of the physician in the clinical laboratory, the better for the essential work of the laboratory. At the same time, the fewer times the chemist is called on for his opinion as to whether a given determination is normal or pathologic, the better for the patient and the hospital. A physician, who believed his knowledge of chemistry to be adequate and who was asked to pass critical judgment on the work of the laboratory studied the intricacies of the work,

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