[Skip to Navigation]
December 1967

Closing Remarks

Author Affiliations

From Harvard Medical School and Boston City Hospital, Boston.

Arch Neurol. 1967;17(6):586-587. doi:10.1001/archneur.1967.00470300028006

AFTER three days of intensive discussion, it is clear that, to paraphrase Calvin Coolidge's terse remark about the sermon on sin, no one in this highly select company is "agin" neurology. There is no question about the immense value of ventilating the many troublesome and cogent problems represented by Dr. O'Leary's loaded questions, and I wish only to present a few reflections about the main problem that seems to me to emerge from our conference.

In all our discussions, no one felt it necessary to define a neurologist. Yet, upon this hangs a dilemma that cropped up at more than one point and which is germane to the original need for this conference. There is no question that the neurophysiologist, the neuroanatomist, the neuropathologist, and the neurosurgeon are neurologists. I would also maintain that the central object of our enquiry is the neurophysician. It has always seemed striking to

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
Add or change institution