[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
January 4, 1902


JAMA. 1902;XXXVIII(1):39. doi:10.1001/jama.1902.02480010043012

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 New York physician who recently inoculated a young woman with alleged bovine tuberculosis has thus far succeeded in obtaining notoriety, which was probably what he desired. But the notoriety he has received is not altogether a desirable one. His experiment was poorly conceived, lacked many of the essentials for a satisfactory scientific proof of what it was intended to show, and is at last discredited by the findings of the Brooklyn health authorities that his inoculated cow did not have tuberculosis. If the young woman has the disease, as he asserts, it must, therefore, have been from some other cause. As regards the ethics of the performance there can be but one opinion. Had he been confident that Koch's views were correct and that there was no danger in the inoculation, he would have a better case, but the reverse of this was the fact, and the general impression

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