Gies, W. J.

English

ZENODO

STUDIES ON ELECTIVE LOCALIZATION: FOCAL INFEC-TION, WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO ORAL SEPSISCOMMENT ON BIBLIOGRAPHIC DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE ORIGINALFORM OF A PAPER ON THIS SUBJECT, BY RoSENOW IN THIS JOURNAL,AND A REPRINT OF IT IN THE JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL DENTALASSOCIATION, FOR THE INFORMATION AND CONVENIENCE OF STU-DENTS OF THE LITERATURE OF THIS SUBJECTWILLIAM J. GIESINTRODUCTIONWe published, in the September issue of this JOURNAL, on pages205 to 267, inclusive, a paper by Dr. E. C. Rosenow, entitled: "Studieson elective localization: focal infection with special reference to oralsepsis." This paper had been read at the March (1919) meeting ofthe First District Dental Society of the State of New York. Dr.Rosenow presented it, also, at a meeting of the Chicago DentalSociety on September 16, shortly before the issuance of the numberof the JOURNAL OF DENTAL RESEARCH containing it.At the request of the editor of the Journal of the National DentalAssociation we consented to his proposal that Dr. Rosenow's paperbe republished in that journal. Accordingly, the reprint of the paperappeared in the November number of the Journal of the NationalDental Association (1919, vi), on pages 983 to 1023, inclusive. Un-fortunately, however, the editor did not publish with it a state-ment that the paper was a reprint from the JOURNAL OF DENTALRESEARCH. Despite the general appearance of sameness of the twoeditions of the paper, it is impossible for any one not conversantwith these facts, to ascertain, without careful and lengthy study,whether the two publications are practically identical or materiallydifferent.We know that many earnest reviewers of the literature of focalinfection would be embarrassed and handicapped by uncertainty519permission. at FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIV on June 12, 2015 For personal use only. No other uses withoutjdr.sagepub.comDownloaded from WILLIAM J. GIESwhether these two versions of Dr. Rosenow's important paper, thatseem to be practically the same, are in reality identical in import;and much time would be wasted from the consequent necessity ofcomparing the two editions, word for word, to determine whether onecontained anything material that is not published in the other.In order to do what we can to prevent the anticipated embarrass-ment and loss of time for students of Dr. Rosenow's important work,we publish below an indication of the results of a comparative exami-nation of the two editions of Dr. Rosenow's paper as published origi-nally in the JOURNAL OF DENTAL RESEARCH and reprinted, later, inthe Journal of the National Dental Association. Future bibliographerswill see here, almost at a glance, what it has taken us hours of detailedexamination to establish.THE TEXTSThe texts of the two versions, ignoring immaterial verbal differencesat a few places, are identical except in the particulars indicated below.Pages 208-209 of the original; page 985 of the reprint. The differ-ences in the following sentence, in parallel versions, are shown at theitalicised parts:OriginalThe observation which I havemade, that bacteria isolated fromthe tissues in metastatic lesionsshow a greater affinity for the sametissues in animals than do thoseisolated from the primary focus,seems to indicate that the repeatedoccurrence of the same type oflesion, such as pulpitis in a givencase, may be the result of a blood-borne infection from one pulp toanother, as well as from infectionfrom a focus in the tonsil.ReprintThe observation which I havemade, that bacteria isolated fromthe tissues in metastatic lesionsshow greater affinity for that tissuethan those from the primary focus,seems to indicate that the repeatedoccurrence of the same type oflesion, such as pulpits in a givencase, may be the result of a blood-borne infection from one pulp toanother, as well as from infectionfrom a focus in the tonsil or elsewhere.Page 210 of the original: page 986 of the reprint. At the end of thesentence regarding the preparation of mediums for bacteriologicstudy-"they are prepared from meat infusion or beef extract in the520permission. at FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIV on June 12, 2015 For personal use only. No other uses withoutjdr.sagepub.comDownloaded from ELECTIVE LOCALIZATION OF BACTERIAusual way, and titrated so that the final product is from 0.5 to 0.7acid to phenolphthalein,"-the reprint adds: "and of a hydrogen ionconcentration of from 7.2 to 7.6."Page 241 of the original; page 1006 of the reprint. The reprint addsthe bibliographic numerals 42 and 45 to the following sentence inthe original: "The organisms have been demonstrated in the lesionsin animals, although absent elsewhere, by cultures and in sections(20, 33, 34, 35)."Page 246 of the original; page 1010 of the reprint. The followingparagraph is an addition that did not appear at the correspondingposition, or at any other place, in the original (p. 246, second linefrom the bottom):"Thus in the case of pulpitis, dental neuritis, and myositis (41) inwhich elective localization of the streptococci from the pulp of thetooth and from the muscle was demonstrated (figs. 36 to 46), thestreptococcus having the same invasive power was found also in thenose, pharynx, and stool."THE ILLUSTRATIONSThe illustrations in the original (figs. 1 to 35, inclusive) are givenin the reprint and designated by the same numerals. Except fordifferences in degrees of reduction, they present essentially the samephotographic features in each version.Figures 36 to 46, inclusive, in the reprint, constitute an additionto the illustrations in the original. "Figures 36 to 46, inclusive,illustrate the findings in the case of pulpitis, dental neuritis andmyositis" referred to in the paragraph quoted above as an addition,in the reprint, to the text in the original.The color-plate of the original (plate 1) is substituted, in the reprint,by a black print prepared from a copy of the color-plate in the original.There is no indication, by the editor in the reprint, of the degreesof reduction of the several illustrations, from the sizes of the photo-graphs. Consequently, the author's statements of magnifications, inthe legends with his illustrations, do not express, in the reprint, whathe intended to indicate; and cannot be interpreted, from lack ofeditorial allusion to the degrees of reduction effected.521.permission. at FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIV on June 12, 2015 For personal use only. No other uses withoutjdr.sagepub.comDownloaded from WILLIAM J. GIESIn the reprint the "leaders" are missing from some of the illustra-tions, although the "leaders" are used in the legends, thus making itimpossible for the reader to follow, in the reprint, the author's com-parative references to particular places on his illustrations.CONCLUSIONSThe material bibliographic differences between the original paper,as published on pages 205 to 267 in this volume, and the reprint, aspublished on pages 983 to 1023 in a recent issue of the Journal ofthe National Dental Association (1919, vi), are the additions in thereprint of (a) the paragraph quoted above on "pulpitis, dental neuritis,and myositis," and of (b) the corresponding illustrations (figs. 36to 46).The original in this JOURNAL, and these two additions in the reprintin the Journal of the National Dental Association, give the student thecomplete story, with all the illustrations, in the two versions of Dr.Rosenow's paper on "elective localization."Biochemical Laboratory of Columbia University,Schools of Medicine and Dentistry.437 West 59th Street,New York City522permission. at FLORIDA INTERNATIONAL UNIV on June 12, 2015 For personal use only. No other uses withoutjdr.sagepub.comDownloaded from 

Studies on Elective Localization: Focal Infection, with Special Reference to Oral Sepsis: Comment on Bibliographic Differences Between the Original form of a Paper on this Subject, by Rosenow in This Journal, and a Reprint of it in the Journal of the National Dental Association, for the Information and Convenience of Students of the Literature of This Subject

https://zenodo.org/record/1861466/files/article.pdf

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

ZENODO