This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.
Mr. President and Gentlemen:—It will not be necessary for me to take any time in giving the arguments in favor of teaching medical students by the laboratory method many of the sciences which must enter into the curriculum of study. I will take it for granted that all reputable teachers of medicine understand that analytical chemistry, practical anatomy, bacteriology, histology, physiology, analysis of urine, pathology, etc., must be taught in the laboratory in part at least, if taught at all. How can you expect a practitioner to tell whether a given bit of tissue is from a malignant growth or not, when he has never seen a cancer cell? How could he be trusted with such an examination when he has never used a microscope, cut a section, or made a microscopical mount? How can the young practitioner diagnositicate tuberculosis in its early stages, when he has had no practical
VAUGHAN VC. THE KIND AND AMOUNT OF LABORATORY WORK WHICH SHOULD BE REQUIRED IN OUR MEDICAL SCHOOLS. JAMA. 1892;XIX(23):665–667. doi:10.1001/jama.1892.02420230015001c
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: