MANCHESTER

1894 The Lancet  
rejoinder, appended the note which follows on this letter. Although a reply has already been given with regard to this controversy by the editors of the Glasgow Medical Journal, I consider it most desirable that the Editors of THE LANCET also should express their opinion on this question of ethics. It is not to me a personal matter. What I want to do is to vindicate professional ethics as applied to such cases. T a,m. Sirs. vonrs fa,ithfullv. July 3rd, 1894. DAVID NEWMAN. Editorial Note in the
more » ... torial Note in the '° Glasgow Medical Journal. " "We publish Mr. Lennox Browne's letter, but must at the same time express regret at its tone and method. Dr. Newman pointed out that Mr. Browne, in what he cites as an exact quotation, alters an important word, thereby changing the meaning entirely. Mr. Browne does not deny altering the word, and we are convinced that his contention that he has not altered the meaning is not made good. When an author who is citing a case as cancerous from the onset states that at one period he believed it to be innocent, it is altering his meaning entirely to substitute "demonstrated" for "believed," " and to make it appear that he still believes it to be innocent at the time of the first examination. Mr. Browne's further claim that Dr. Newman was at one time an adherent of the opinion that such innocent growths may by surgical interference be transformed into malignant tumours, seems to us to be equally devoid of foundation. The passages quoted by Mr. Browne from Dr. Newman's writings show that the latter believes in the transformation of innocent into malignant growths, but we have not discovered a single word favouring the idea that he ever believed that instrumental interference is an element in producing such transformation. The long quotations in which Mr. Browne indulges are thus entirely wide of the mark and do not bear out his contention. We have made these remarks without consulting Dr. Newman, and simply to bring back the reader to the points in dispute, which Mr. Browne obscures in a cloud of words.
doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(01)64476-3 fatcat:i4hs5i3gqfg4tcd4oxermjdzee