[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]
November 18, 1899


JAMA. 1899;XXXIII(21):1300-1301. doi:10.1001/jama.1899.02450730056019

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.


A few medical writers are victims of a reprehensible habit that is not pleasant to contemplate, viz.: the habit of reading the same paper before two or more different societies. When discovered by the profession, as they all are sooner or later, a variety of reasons for their actions occurs to their critics. It is frequently said of them that, being unable to write with ease, they must make one production go as far as possible. This is the most charitable view, even though it involves the inference that only the vain desire for personal advertisement could lead them to risk the affront to an audience that should discover it was being served cold victuals instead of the expected warm sustenance. No doubt these writers never stop to consider the magnificent proportions of a vanity that leads an author to think his own production is worthy of repeated self-production. Of

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