| Past two years | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 388 | 223 | 8 |
| Full Text Views | 2 | 1 | 0 |
| PDF Downloads | 2 | 2 | 0 |
Introduction
M. M. Brooke
M. M. Brooke
Search for other papers by M. M. Brooke in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Search for other papers by M. M. Brooke in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
By way of introduction to this panel on amebiasis we would like to recall the statement of the eminent English protozoologist, Dr. C. M. Wenyon (1947), who recently stated that interest in amebiasis seems to be stimulated by great wars. That was true after the First World War and it is occurring again at the present time. We know that groups of our servicemen were exposed to Endamoeba histolytica during their time in the services; and from the work of Becker (1946), Jacobs et al. (1946), and others, we realize that many of these servicemen must have returned to civilian life harboring the parasite, but—what has been the effect of these service-acquired infections upon the amebiasis problem in the United States? In view of the pre-existing prevalence of E. histolytica, it is well to remember the statement of Simmonds (1943):
Author Notes
Editors Note: One paper of the panel, the fourth of the series, entitled “The Treatment of Hepatic Amebiasis with Chloroquine”, by Neal J. Conan, Department of Medicine, New York University College of Medicine, New York City, was withdrawn by the author, and in a revised form appearing under the above title in the American Journal of Medicine, 1949 (3), pp, 309–320. The discussion of this paper contributed by E. W. Dennis, appears in its proper sequence.
| Past two years | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 388 | 223 | 8 |
| Full Text Views | 2 | 1 | 0 |
| PDF Downloads | 2 | 2 | 0 |