[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
February 6, 1904

SOME HISTOLOGIC FACTS THAT CONTRADICT THE GENERALLY ACCEPTED ODONTOBLAST THEORY.

Author Affiliations

STRASSBURG, GERMANY.

JAMA. 1904;XLII(6):357-364. doi:10.1001/jama.1904.92490510008002a
Abstract

While I feel very much honored by your kind invitation, I nevertheless approach my task with some trepidation, because my histologic examinations lead me to conclusions that are considerably at variance with those of others who have worked along similar lines in past years. In Germany, I have for the present only a small number of followers, and I fear that the majority of you who are assembled here to-day are also fanatic adherents of the old odontoblast theory; consequently, I assure you that I expect only a moderate amount of applause and approbation at your hands.

But it is in your country precisely that the first voices were raised years ago against the prevailing views in regard to the rôle of the odontoblasts, and while I do not fully share the views of Heizmann, Boedecker, Abbot and Andrews, I nevertheless recognize in these men brave pioneers, and their example

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