DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS OF THE DYSENTERIES 221 



to be evolved as obstacles are encountered. Such things cannot be 

 anticipated here. The literature is very rich on technical methods 

 and an attempt to adequately summarize it here is not to be con- 

 sidered. However, the study of the monographs of Dobell (1917, 

 1919), and of Walker (1913a), is strongly recommended. 



This closes a rather diffuse discussion of some of the unsolved 

 problems affecting the diagnosis of the dysenteries. I have gone 

 into many things that may appear to have very little to do with 

 the subject. That is because it is my belief, that our first task under 

 existing circumstances, lies in the studied elimination, by thorough 

 methods, of a number of imperfectly studied factors and vaguely 

 conceived assumptions that have been accepted as partially, if not 

 wholly, true simply because they have been put forth so many 

 times. They have made the problem as a whole seem more vast 

 than it probably is. To dispose of these fallacies, further knowl- 

 edge must be gained on maladies that bear no relations whatever 

 to dysentery. To many, this will seem a very cumbersome and 

 indirect way of going about it. To me, it seems the only way left 

 to us. After all, our real object is the lessening of suffering and 

 the saving of life, which in this workaday world must even dis- 

 place the transcendent joy of arriving at abstract truth; and yet, 

 wherein lies the difference? I am not thinking of the highly trained 

 physician who is in close touch with other specialists and works 

 by modern methods ; I am thinking of the submerged ninety per 

 cent who have been systematically schooled in error these many 

 years, and who have been led to lean heavily on generalities be- 

 cause they were not in the way of getting anything else. 



It is my belief that if this sketchy program is carried out, not 

 only will considerable light be thrown on the validity of certain 

 unknown factors affecting our methods of diagnosis of dysentery, 

 but in the process a wealth of other information will be made 

 available for other studies of equal importance. No effort or detail 

 will be wasted if we can arrive at that happy end. Truly enough, 

 it is difficult to deal with such broad and elusive problems, and 

 to those young investigators (and perhaps a few of the older 

 ones), who may feel themselves oppressed by the task, I would 

 commend a careful reading of that most attractive and inspiring 

 text of scientific method — deKruif's Microbe Hunters (1926). 



