1116

ratio of latent to manifest infections is lowerin whooping-cough. It is to be hoped that Dr.STOCKS’S careful study will lead to the paymentof increased attention to what is, at present, oneof the most serious of the infectious diseases ofearly childhood.

DIET IN DIABETESNEARLY four year ago 1 a correspondent in our

columns drew attention to the opinions andresults of Prof. WILHELM FALTA, of Vienna, whohad long advocated the use of higher carbo-

hydrate diets in the treatment of diabetes.

Although a few workers in this country had beenallowing their patients more carbohydrate, withinsulin, it was not until 1930 that interest in thismethod of treatment became general, and thebelief in extreme restriction of carbohydratesbegan to give way. Since then most of the authori-ties, both in England and America, have spokenencouragingly of the newer form of diet, andthough the change of opinion was slow at firstit has lately become rapid. Nor is this change aslight one. For many years after the discoveryof insulin diabetic patients were kept strictly toan abnormal diet, and an allowance of carbo-

hydrate greater than 60 g. a day was rare exceptin the mildest cases. On such diets constantattention to the intake of both carbohydrate andfat was necessary, and when still smaller quantitiesof the former were allowed the risk of acidosis wasalways present. A typical diet, laid down less thanfour years ago, would have read : carbohydrate,50 g. ; protein, 70 g. ; fat, 130 g. To-day thequantities of fat and carbohydrate have beenreversed by many physicians, so that the figuresmight read: carbohydrate, 200 g. ; fat, 60 g.The main cause of so violent a reaction againstthe older practice is that the results it gave were notfound to justify the difficulties and disadvantagesof its application. It was thus not uncommon tofind, as it was put in one discussion,2 that patientswho either could not or would not adhere to alow carbohydrate diet did as well or better thanthose who rigidly obeyed their doctors’ orders.When the carbohydrate is considerably increased

it is found that a very small addition to the insulinallowance is often sufficient to maintain the urinefree of sugar ; in some cases two or three times asmuch carbohydrate can be taken on the same oreven a. lower insulin dosage. The use of suchhigher carbohydrate diets with insulin is a materialgain from the patient’s point of view, because heis able to take a simpler and more physiologicaldiet. Many clinical reports show also that he feelsbetter. As regards the effect on the disease itselfit is perhaps early yet to judge, but a good dealof evidence points to some improvement underthe new regime.3 s It is certain, however, that thetotal amount of carbohydrate allowed, if covered1 Hunt, T. C.: Restricted Diets or Insulin? THE LANCET,1929, i., 50.

2 Ibid., 1931, i., 351.3 Graham, G., Clark A., and Robertson, H. E.: Ibid.,

Nov. 5th, 1932, p. 990. Jamieson, H. C.: Canad. Med. Assoc.Jour., October, 1932, p. 389.

by insulin, is not the only factor concerned in thetreatment of diabetes. The total calorie intakeis certainly important, especially in elderly patientswho have a tendency to obesity. The proportionof fat which should be given is still a matter fordiscussion, though FALTA and others hold thatlarge variations have little or no influence uponthe hyperglycaemia or glycosuria. Clearly unlessevidence is strong that a low fat intake is beneficialit is to the great advantage of a high carbohydratediet that fats may be taken at the patient’s owndiscretion, without risk of ketosis, so that only thecarbohydrates require weighing.The diet which seems to be proving most suit-

able for the diabetic is the one which, with the helpof insulin, most nearly approaches the normal.It is reasonable to conclude that the workof the last few years has shown that with insulinextreme variations in diet are possible, whilstmaintaining patients in good health and free of

glycosuria. During these years however theincidence of diabetes has shown little change,and there is no proof that we have yet anymeans of obtaining regeneration of the islet cellsof the pancreas. It is probably on these lines,rather than by dietary variations in the controlof the disease, that further advance is most likelyto come, and there may be pointers in the rightdirection among the suggestions put forward at therecent Vienna congress (reported on page 1127)over which Prof. FALTA presided. Meanwhile it is anotable gain that a greater freedom in food is nowknown to be possible in diabetes, and if there isany danger in the change of opinion it is only thatthis freedom may perhaps be carried too far.

MEDICINE AND THE STATE

DURING the decade preceding the war Statemedicine in this country developed rapidly fromits environmental preoccupations toward functionsmore directly affecting the individual member ofthe community. The Notification of Births Act,1907, brought the health departments into earlyand direct contact with the mother and her infant ;the Education (Administrative Provisions) Act ofthe same year established school medical inspectionand treatment; the Insurance Act, 1911, madea large proportion of the medical professionvirtually part-time State officials, and broughtinto being extensive provision for the tubercu-lous ; while the Mental Deficiency Act, 1913,launched schemes for the care and control of the

mentally deficient. The outbreak of war broughtan acceleration of this movement, the preventionand treatment of venereal diseases becoming anational and local charge as the result of thePublic Health (Venereal Diseases) Regulations,1916, and great extensions of the local authorities’powers and duties in relation to the welfare ofmothers and children resulting from the passageof the Maternity and Child Welfare Act, 1918.Indeed, so rapid were the developments that therebegan to arise in the minds of private practitioners

1117

a good deal of uneasiness about these apparentencroachments on the field of private practice, andthis disquiet was only allayed by an admirablereport of November, 1928, by Dr. ALFRED Cox,medical secretary of the British Medical Associa-tion. The tendency of public health legislationwas clearly in a direction which required thecareful attention of the medical profession in Irelation both to the welfare of the people andto their own interests, and the advocacy by theAssociation of extensions of medical benefitbefore the Royal Commission on National HealthInsurance in 1926 was a sign that practitioners hadcome to realise the inability of persons of the insuredclass to obtain adequate medical attention byprivate means. A large measure of socialisationof medicine then seemed imminent. As far backas 1920 the Dawson Report had formulated a

scheme for coördinating general practice with

hospitals and the existing clinic system of localauthorities through a network of primary andsecondary health centres linked up with the greatteaching hospitals. Ten years later the BritishMedical Association adopted its " Hospital Policy "and " Proposals for a General Medical Service forthe Nation," which were largely an acceptanceand an elaboration of the Dawson scheme, andof a widely extended system of medical insurance,regard being taken of the new position whichhad been created by the passage of the LocalGovernment Act, 1929.The situation is now very different from what

it was two years ago. Excessive claims on sicknessbenefits and the abnormal burdens falling on

unemployment insurance funds have cast doubt

upon the soundness of the whole idea of socialinsurance, both from the economic and the moralstandpoint. The international trade slump andour own consequent financial distresses have putout of court in the meantime any extension ofservices involving subventions which might be aburden on industry, whether directly or throughrates and taxes. Moreover, the relative failureto attain that integration of the medical serviceswhich the Ministry of Health Act of 1919 and theLocal Government Act, 1929, were designed to

bring about, centrally in the one case and locallyin the other, has revealed the practical obstacleswhich stand in the way of medical idealism.It is useful therefore to ask whether the ideashave been sound and to observe in what directionother peoples have been going. Before theirfinancial crisis the people of America, faced witha much looser public health organisation than ours,revealing wide variation in provision from Stateto State and county to county, were beginning topursue extensive investigations into the machineryof the medical services, of which the WhiteHouse Conference on Child Health and Protectionwas a notable example. The most valuable,however, has probably been that instituted in1928 by the Millbank Memorial Fund and carriedout by Sir ARTHUR NEWSHOLME, its scope beingthe " relation between the private and officialpractice of medicine, with special reference to

the prevention of disease " throughout the civilisedworld. Sir ARTHUR has related the facts as hecollected them in various countries in threevolumes of International Studies, and in a bookpublished more recently 2 he gives independently,but, of course, with ample reference to those

publications, the conclusions he has arrived at asto the principles which should govern the futureprogress of State medicine and some guidance pastthe pitfalls in its way. The earlier volumes were

largely the jottings of a peripatetic investigatorand serve for reference rather than consecutive

reading, but " Medicine and the State" is the

ripe fruit of long years of experience as a generalpractitioner, medical officer of health of a provincialtown, and chief medical officer of the local govern-ment board, fertilised by the study of foreignmethods which he has recently had the opportunityto make.

Apart from the admirable hospital systems ofScandinavian countries (especially those in Denmark)and their relatively complete schemes of socialinsurance, Sir ARTHUR does not suggest that wehave to borrow from other European nations.He finds the medical profession in Germany,France, and Belgium uneasy in their relationsto State insurance and the establishment of

polyclinics, especially in Eastern Europe, a

dangerous substitute for that cooperation of the

general practitioners, consultants, hospitals, andthe public health service, which is urgently neededand which can only be obtained for a largeproportion of the population by means of organisa-tion on some other basis than fee-paying forservices rendered. He criticises all existinginsurance schemes for their weakness on the

preventive side. In his view there can be littlefurther advance in personal hygiene except throughthe influence of the general practitioner whom heregards as still imperfectly equipped for suchwork. The first step, he thinks, is to introducea complete medical examination of every entrantto State insurance and to develop a system of

periodical examination of all contributors withoutwaiting for sickness to bring doctor and patienttogether. As a corollary, more and better teachingof preventive medicine is essential. Effectivearrangements are required for making hospitaltreatment available for those who need it withoutthe intrusion of any other criterion, but it isnoted that no country has succeeded in evolvingan insurance scheme which is capable ofapproaching financial capacity to bear this burdenupon its funds. Sir ARTHUR retains, on the whole,his faith in the British type of public healthservice, but he looks forward steadily to the timewhen the wider association of general practitionerswith public medical provision will enable them todo some, at least, of the work now done byassistants in health departments in connexionwith the welfare of mothers and children. Several

passages in the book seem to imply that he is

1 London : George Allen and Unwin, Ltd., 16s. each.2 Medicine and the State. By Sir Arthur Newsholme, K.C.B.,

M.D., F.R.C.P. London : George Allen and Unwin, Ltd. 1932.Pp. 300. 7s. 6d.

1118

doubtful whether a really great advance in theapplication of the preventive idea can be attainedoutside of a salaried service ; but he is obviously z,quite aware that no such service can be establisheduntil it is welcome to the medical profession. Hisimmediate and practical suggestion is an extensionin quality rather than quantity. Against someof the abuses of insurance he suggests technicalsafeguards derived from the practice of otherlands, but he sees no final solution of this problembut in a higher moral outlook. He is firmly abeliever in the perfectibility of mankind and

quotes with approval in reference to these mattersthe saying of Senator ELiHU ROOT that " pessimismis criminal weakness."

All these things appear to be beyond the realmof practical politics just now. The objects of the

Local Government Act have been only partiallyfulfilled. The outdoor medical service of the poor-law has been little changed. Cooperation betweenvoluntary and council hospitals is not much closer.Indeed, the heralded reform in local governmenthas proved in some places less a break up than aconsolidation of the poor-law, and, where stepshave been taken to transfer hospitals out of its

atmosphere, there is, here and there, an itchingto bring them back in the sacred name of economy.But the pendulum swings fast in our time, andwe can hardly foresee how soon we may be facedwith dangers to medicine of the opposite kind.Sir ARTHUR NEWSHOLME’S valuable studies will be

indispensable to those who wish to prepare theirminds for some of the medico-political problems ofthe future.

ANNOTATIONS

THE B.B.C. ON MEDICAL PRIVILEGE

By means of lectures and mock trials the B.B.C.is pursuing the laudable object of acquainting uswith the law which every citizen is supposed to know.The latest item in the series of trials, broadcastunder the title of " Consider your Verdict," consistedof the closing speeches and the judge’s summing-upin imaginary proceedings against a medical practi-tioner. Listeners were invited to suppose that a

doctor had been asked in the witness-box to answerquestions in violation of professional confidence andthat, instead of refusing to answer, he had givenfalse answers, thereby exposing himself to a prosecu-tion for perjury. In so far as the dramatising ofthis hypothesis gave publicity to the principle ofmedical secrecy, and in so far as it explained that the Iprinciple exists in the interests of the patients and ’,is therefore for the public benefit, the mock trial ’,was excellent. In so far as it suggested that doctors,instead of keeping their mouths shut, are ready togive false answers upon oath, it was less admirable.

The hypothetical doctor was supposed to havebeen asked two questions before the magistrates-had he treated a patient for drug-taking, and hadhe supplied the patient with dangerous drugs ? Toboth these questions he answered " No." When

charged with perjury he admitted that the answerswere untrue but, pleading that they were made inaccordance with professional etiquette, he contendedthat they were not " wilfully" false within the

meaning of the Perjury Act. Actually, of course,in real life no practitioner would have adopted soinept and so mistaken a line of conduct. He mightor might not have declined to answer, according tohis personal view of his professional duty. There-

upon the magistrates might or might not have taken.serious notice of the refusal. They have not thepowers of an assize court to commit a witness forcontempt of court. The Summary Jurisdiction Actsenable magistrates to send a witness to gaol for sevendays if he refuses to answer proper questions "withoutoffering any just excuse for such refusal." Thewitness might or might not successfully maintainthat medical privilege was a just excuse. But noneof these contingencies would give a jury a chanceto answer the glib question " should a doctor tell ? "The B.B.C., therefore, to bring the doctor’s dilemmawithin the range of the " Consider your Verdict "series, had to drag in the exotic and improbableelement of perjury.

The statement that we are all supposed to knowthe law is not quite accurate. The true legalmaxim is that ignorance of the law excuses nobody.A few years ago a witness at the Wandsworth CountyCourt gave yet another version with which manywill sympathise.

"

I know," he said, " that ignor-ance is no excuse for the law." Whichever of theseversions we may prefer, we shall all welcome theefforts of the B.B.C. to instruct us. The medicalprofession, however, must mildly protest against thebroadcasting of a suggestion that perjury is partof the professional duty of a doctor.

TUMOURS OF THE SUPRARENAL MEDULLA

THE tumour of the suprarenal medulla describedby Mr. F. W. Law elsewhere in our present issue hastwo important characteristics-namely, its occurrencein early infancy, and the development of metastasesin the cranium. Records of such tumours are now

fairly numerous-J. Klein ’- has recently reported asimilar case-and so frequently do these character-istics recur, that it may almost be said that multipletumours of the skull bones and orbits in a childunder 2 years indicate either chloroma or malignanttumour of the suprarenal medulla. There are, itmust be admitted, cases on record-those of theso-called Pepper type-in which metastases tend tobe confined to the abdomen, the liver being theirchief site of deposit. Frew found that these weremostly tumours originating in the right suprarenal,and he explained their limitation on the grounds ofpeculiarities in the lymphatic drainage. A studyof the larger number now on record, however, showsthat the association of right-sided tumours withlimitation to the abdomen does not hold veryconstantly. Indeed it seems doubtful whether thedifferentiation of two clinical types, the Peppertype on the one hand, and the Hutchison type withits numerous cranial and other bone metastases onthe other hand, is of much value. Quite a numberof cases in which liver involvement has predominated,and which might thus pertain to the Pepper group,have shown cranial metastases. It should beremembered that Pepper’s collection of cases was

made largely with a view to studying congenitaltumours of the liver as well as the suprarenals, sothat liver involvement was a somewhat prominentfeature of his observations. As a general rule it

1 Amer. Jour. Med. Sci., October, 1932, p. 491.