GROWTH. 



61 



of children weighing 6 kg. or under would indicate that the factors 

 for K are 10.0 and 10.1 for boys and girls, respectively, the Lissauer 

 factor (10.3) is still in close agreement with our factors. This shows 

 the complete futility of other constants formerly used, which were as 

 high as 11.9, the constant of Meeh. 1 



TABLE 14. Constants for computing surface area 



A close analysis of Lissauer's data has been given in earlier publica- 

 tions from this Laboratory. 2 The constants obtained from the meas- 

 urements of children by Lissauer range from 8.92 to 12.40; but Lis- 

 sauer emphasizes the fact that 10 of his 12 children were very much 

 under weight. The factor finally selected by Lissauer as representative 

 of normal was a value determined on a normal infant, S i. While 

 all of our own children were selected primarily from the standpoint of 

 normality, and while the constants for children at this early age, accord- 

 ing to our calculations, more nearly approach the factor 10.0 or 10.1, 

 we still believe that the Lissauer factor is on the average very repre- 

 sentative for children under 10 kg. in weight. Our factors indicate 

 strongly that there is not a very great disproportion in the surface 

 area with changes in body-weight under these conditions. In ex- 

 plaining some of the aberrant types of metabolism frequently found 

 with atrophic children, it has been the custom to lay considerable 

 emphasis upon the fact that there is a profound disturbance in the 

 relationship between body-weight and body-surface with under- 

 weight children. 3 Based upon our normal measurements and a 

 careful analysis of Lissauer's measurements, we believe that our 

 constants are the best factors for computing the body-surface from 

 the. body-weight and that a considerable degree of emaciation in all 

 probability does not profoundly affect the constant. 



As an indication of the accuracy of these computations of surface 

 area by the revised Lissauer formula, taking into account weight only 

 and our several constants, we have recorded in tables 12 and 13 the 

 areas as computed by the Du Bois linear formula and as computed 

 using our several constants. It will be found that with a number of 

 our children, especially at the lower weights, the Du Bois linear 



1 Meeh, Zeitschr. f. Biol., 1879, 15, p. 425. 



2 Benedict and Talbot, Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. No. 201, 1914, p. 164; see also Harris and 



Benedict, Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. No. 279, 1919, p. 143. 



3 Benedict and Talbot, Carnegie Inst. Wash. Pub. No. 201, 1914, p. 163. 



