[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
November 12, 1932


Author Affiliations

Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass.

JAMA. 1932;99(20):1710. doi:10.1001/jama.1932.02740720064031

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:  —In an editorial in The Journal (October 15, p. 1356) you discuss the papers by Eising and by Ross on the effect of irradiated oils on the healing of purulent wounds. In this editorial you repeat the conclusion of each of these workers that the effect was due to "secondary ultraviolet emanations."We have accumulated evidence (J. Bact.23:429 [June] 1932; J. Indust. & Engin. Chem.24:1181 [Oct.] 1932) that this germicidal action is evidently due to certain organic peroxide compounds given off from the irradiated oils. We have proved conclusively that secondary emanations of light are not responsible for this phenomenon. Recently Dr. Eising agreed with us in this explanation.The "radiation theory" has been used before to explain phenomena. Certain chemical substances will fog photographic plates in the same manner as light.It is unfortunate that your editorial reiterated what we feel certain

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