STUDIES ON TUMOUR FORMATION
STUDIES ON TUMOUR FORMATION
复制标题
肿瘤形成的研究
DOI：
10.1136/pgmj.26.301.611-a
复制
发表时间：
1950
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
G. W. Nicholson
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
G. W. Nicholson
没有病人的同意，医生们什么也不给，并与他们科学地讨论他们的疾病。一个奴隶助手，如果他在场的话，会大笑起来，说，“你这个傻瓜，你不是在治疗你的病人，但几乎是在教育他，所以不是一个健康的人，而是他自己的医生。“这种区别对待在希波克拉底语料库中没有任何地方表明。例如，在《传染病》一书中，病人的职业往往与他们的病历一起列出;其中提到了鞋匠，皮革工人，市场管理员，矿工，葡萄园工，漂洗工，石匠，教师，教师，厨师，园丁，马夫，拳击手，船上的押运员，商人，许多妻子和孩子，还有许多奴隶，主要是国内的。这些案件都经过仔细调查和描述。该论文的目的是纯粹描述性的，治疗几乎没有提到，但没有任何差异出现在各种情况下的态度。也许为我们撰写论文的医生比大多数人更认真。最后，关于希波克拉底誓言的几点评论可能是有趣的。某些一般性规定是众所周知的;不得向任何要求使用致命药物的人提供药物，不得进行堕胎，所有病人的人身和私人事务，无论是有关系的还是自由的，都应得到尊重。但是，学习者也发誓不做外科手术，而是让位给这门艺术的从业者。这种承诺不能不虚伪地成为对那些在必要时做某些肮脏工作的人的道德谴责。埃德尔斯坦博士在他的版本（《医学史公报》补编第1号，约翰霍普金斯出版社，1943年）中将其解释为由于毕达哥拉斯哲学家的禁欲主义传统而产生的规定，毕达哥拉斯哲学家有一条反对流血的规则。据他说，整个誓言有一个毕达哥拉斯的味道，最初是局限于这种哲学或宗教信仰的医生。它的其他规定一直被医学界以健全的本能保留到我们自己的日子。这是尼科尔森的一系列论文，最初出现在盖伊的医院报告中。尼科尔森的工作，长期熟悉的病理学家，是值得更多的观众。很少有医学家写得比他更风趣，也很少有医学家根据事实进行如此有逻辑的论证。我们有一系列的…
doctors who gave nothing without their patient's consent and discussed their ailments scientifically with them. A slave assistant, if he were present at this sort of treatment, would burst out laughing, and say, "You fool, you are not doctoring your patient, but almost educating him, so as to be not a healthy man but his own doctor." This differential treatment is nowhere indicated in the Hippocratic Corpus. In the Epidemics, for instance, the occupation of patients is often given with their case-histories; these mention shoemakers, leather-workers, an officer in charge of the market, a miner, vine-dressers, fullers, stone-cutters a schoolteacher , a gramm.aticus, the keeper of a palcestra, a cook, a gardener, a groom, a boxer, a ship's supercargo, a merchant, many wives and children, and also many slaves, mostly domestic. These cases are all carefully investigated and described. The aim of the treatise is purely descriptive, and treatment is hardly mentioned, but no difference whatever appears in the attitude to the various cases. Perhaps the doctors who wrote our treatises were more conscientious than the majority. In conclusion, a few remarks on the Hippocratic Oath may be of interest. Certain general provisions are well known; lethal drugs are not to be administered to anyone who asks for them, abortion is not to be practised, and the persons and private affairs of all patients, bond or free, are to be respected. But the learner also swears not to practise surgery, but to yield place to practitioners of that art. This undertaking cannot without hypocrisy be an ethical condemnation of those who did certain dirty work when it was necessary. It has been interpreted by Dr. Edelstein in his edition (Supplement No. 1 to the Bulletin of the History of Medicine, Johns Hopkins Press, 1943) as a provision due to the ascetic tradition of the Pythagorean philosophers, who had a rule against shedding blood. According to him the whole Oath has a Pythagorean flavour, and was originally conifined to doctors of this philosophical or religious persuasion. Its other provisions have been retained with sound instinct by the medical profession until our own day. THIS iS a collected series of the papers by Nicholson which appeared originally in Guy's Hospital Reports. Nicholson's work, long familiar to pathologists, is well worthy of a larger audience. Few medical men have written more piquantly, or argued so logically from facts. Throughout we have a series …