526 THE POSTERIOR PITUITARY AND THE NERVOUS SYSTEM. 



oughly rested animal; while in the thoroughly tired one "for 

 long distances in the cortex . . . it is difficult to find a 

 cell whose processes are not more or less varicose." That 

 fatigue is the result of an accumulation of products of metabo- 

 lism and especially C0 2 is generally recognized. 



Goddard's procedure appears to us to represent as nearly 

 perfect a one as available staining methods (Cox's and the rapid 

 method show considerable parallelism in Weil and Frank's 

 report, while the mixed and slow methods appear unreliable 

 and contradictory) will allow; and Ms results, in our opinion, 

 portray the actual changes that are produced in the neuron under 

 the influence of poisons of any kind and during sleep: i.e., when 

 the blood-supply of the brain is reduced. 27 



Weil and Frank state that they "are able fully to cor- 

 roborate the statement of Cajal that normal and toxic mate- 

 rial cannot be differentiated by the number of varicosities or 

 of gemmules." The care with which such experiments must 

 be conducted, apart from the method of staining adopted; the 

 need of immediate immersion, and other details to which we 

 have referred, invalidate any opinion that the distinguished 

 Spanish histologist may have expressed on this score, unless 

 he can show that his experimental physiological procedures 

 were as perfect as his staining work must have been. Indeed, 

 we must express the belief that the greater part of the physio- 

 histological work done so far in this connection is valueless 

 owing to the absence of the precautions to which we refer. 



Again, Ramon y Cajal's conclusions that "the nerve-cells 

 do not move, but, on the other hand, that the neuroglia-cells 

 do move" (which underlies his view as to the gemmules and 

 varicosities showing no difference when normal or "toxic"), 

 has been shown by Dercum to embody its own refutation. 

 "Cajal," says the latter author, "points out the fact that the 

 processes of the neuroglia-cells have numerous short arbores- 



27 We wish to particularly emphasize the fact that we are in no way criticis- 

 ing adversely the work of Drs. Weil and Frank. We have nothing but praise to 

 express for these investigators. Much of the searching inquiry to which we are 

 submitting their paper includes the use of features introduced for the first time 

 in the present work, and obviously unknown to them. Indeed, if our views 

 eventually prove to be sound, we will owe much to the counter-evidence Drs. 

 Weil and Frank and, we may add, Dr. H. Heath Bawden have published. S. 



