BY PROF. DR. H. VON ZIEMSSEN,
DIRECTOR OF THE MEDICAL CLINIC IN MUNICH.
In analyzing the views as to the value of antipyretics we may group authors as follows: 1. The extremists, who use only the cold bath, and reject internal antipyretics (Brand, Vogl, Winternitz and others). 2. Those who use luke-warm baths, but reject internal antipyretics (Naunyn and others). 3. Those who, according to indications, use strict and moderate hydrotherapy and internal antipyretics (Liebermeister, Jürgensen, Riess). 4. Those who imagine fever to be a kind of necessary and salutary regulation, arrangement or mechanism, and use antipyretic interference only on the appearance of dangerous conditions or complications (Heubner, Curschmann, and others). 5. Those who regard fever as necessary, reject antipyretics, and only use dietetic measures (Gläser). 6. The class who absolutely deny an influence of therapeutics on the mortality of typhoid (Port).
We thus see that all possible conceptions have
ABSTRACT OF A LECTURE ON ANTIPYRESIS AND ANTIPYRETIC METHODS.. JAMA. 1887;VIII(20):533–537. doi:10.1001/jama.1887.02391450001001
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: