This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on Web of Science (2)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

KEVIN M. CAHILL, MD

Arch Intern Med. 1963;111(6):819-822.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Present-day hepatologists have been known to regard mere gastroenterologists with slight disdain. The liver expert not only regards his domain as the epitome of complex physiology and histology, but firmly believes an insight to liver pathology equips the physician to elucidate a wide range of disease states throughout the body. This imperial attitude cannot be attributed to the upsurge in medical specialization during the past quarter century, nor can it be accounted for by the recent discovery of at least a few facts to bind the myriad of hepatic hypotheses. Its origins stretch far back into the early Greek world, and even the most haughty hepatologist today would not presume competence in several roles claimed for and by their Athenian predecessors twenty-five hundred years ago. Not only did the Greeks regard the spleen and intestines as inferior physical organs, but they assumed a moral superiority of the liver over the . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
LONDON, ENGLAND

Department of Clinical Medicine, Hospital for Tropical Diseases.

Footnotes
Received for publication Oct. 3, 1962; accepted Nov. 6.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?