page182

Contents Page

page184

 

                                                                RETROSPECT                                                       183

 

The sum of these numbers, 4, 23, 1, 21, 12, and 39, makes up the total of 100. Of the four cases remaining under (e), No. 12 was a surgical failure after the enzyme treatment, and the remaining three were evidently very advanced and malignant cases. The lack of anything more than “ improvement “ and “prolongation of life” in the twenty-one cases under (d), and the failure of the four cases under (e) might conceivably be due to injec­tions too weak or doses too small, or to both, for those particular cases. I am, however, reminded of Blu­menthal’s opinion (p. 2), and the possibility or probability must not be overlooked that they may have been so advanced and hopeless that no possible treatment could have saved them. The like probably held in the nine “test” cases treated by Messrs. Ball and Thomas.

The impression made upon the mind of another, who more than once has had success* with the enzyme treat­ment, and who understands and fully appreciates its scientific foundations—I mean Captain F. W. Lambelle, M.D., R.A.M.C., lately operating surgeon of the Military Hospital, York—may be cited.

* In all four cases, treated as described in the present writing. They were (1) chondro-sarcoma of ribs; (2) encephaloid car­cinoma of breast; (3) lympho-sarcoma, induced by X-ray treat­ment for carotid aneurysm by another medical man; and (4) round-celled sarcoma of jaw. The fate of the third is described in the present writing. The other three are, I believe, alive and well. Concerning (2) see Appendix L.

Regarding the case of lympho-sarcoma, it may be mentioned, as showing the true inwardness of the pathological distinction of sarcoma and carcinoma, that in the microscopical examination of sections of the treated tumour after death the keratinous remains of tumour-cells were “mistaken” for epithelial cells by an official pathologist, and the diagnosis of “epithelioma” was given. I do not term this a mistake, for it was clear evidence of the truth of my contention, that sarcoma-cells are as much, or as little, “epithelial cells” as those of epithelioma or of trophoblast.

page182

Contents Page

page184