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

B. C. Gettes, M.D.
Philadelphia

Arch Ophthal. 1950;43(6):1088.

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

To the Editor:

—In the April issue of the ARCHIVES, under "Correspondence," there was published a letter on "Aureomycin in the Treatment of Virus Diseases," by George A. Sheehan Jr., M.D. Dr. Sheehan reported the local use of aureomycin in a case of "conjunctivitis of supposed Newcastle disease."

Aureomycin is undoubtedly a beneficial therapeutic agent in the treatment of virus diseases. However, in January 1950, I had under my care a proved case of Newcastle's conjunctivitis which occurred in a virologist. My associates and I were able to demonstrate inclusion bodies within the epithelial cells both before and after the administration of aureomycin drops, and we found that the drug in no way altered the course of the disease, the presence of which, I repeat, was verified in this case by virologic studies.

The inclusion bodies were demonstrable in scrapings, but not in smears, of the conjunctiva, and the disease . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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