[Skip to Navigation]
Other Articles
October 1912


Am J Dis Child. 1912;IV(4):234-245. doi:10.1001/archpedi.1912.04100220039005

PART I.—NY HENRY HEIMAN, M.D.  Carefully as this disease has been observed for over a quarter of a century, the obscurity regarding its true nature is still as great as ever. While Sachs'1 somewhat modified view of its congenital origin has gained many adherents, among these such careful observers as Schaeffer2 and Vogt,3 there are a considerable number of authorities who hold the opinion that this affection is acquired in nature. Though few now share the view of Hirsch4 that some toxic substance plays a rôle in the etiology of the disease, it is on theoretical grounds alone that it has been discarded. Yet this view is not so wholly improbable or unreasonable as not to demand better founded reasons for its final abandonment. Moreover, within recent years certain observations have been recorded which seem to indicate that other organs besides the nervous system are affected

Add or change institution