X, B, 6 Calderon: Tropical Obstetrical Problems 881 
in textbooks, I present some of our findings, which are based 
upon the measurements of 300 pelves. 
TABLE III.—Comparative measurements of the pelvis in Filipinas and 





Americans. 
E pet einminon pec 
Cm. Cm. Cm. 
Diameter between the iliac spines____------__--_----_-------------- 25. 47 23. 90 1,47 
Miametersbetweenitheliacicrestse = esse ase eae aoe eee eee 27.99 24, 90 3.08 
Diameter between’ theitrochanters=—- ---=--=-- ---—------ ==. eee 30. 90 28.10 2.79 
IB AUG SLO CCG renee ee ee ae a ee te Laer ate Unc uiy Soras et aed 19.71 17. 63 2.08 
Diaconalicongucd tesa eee eee ee some e eens nse eee ee ete 12.26 12. 00 0. 26 
Anteroposterior diameterjof outlet) --- 2 aot ee 12.50 10. 05 2.44 
Htransyverseidiameter Or Outlets see oet eee eee eee ee 11.00 tS OO Seeaan eee 

As can be seen, the pelvis of the Filipina is smaller than that 
of the American or the European in all the diameters except in 
the tranverse diameter of the outlet where they are in the same 
proportion. I cannot go into details, however, in the considera- 
tion of this subject, as our investigation is not as yet complete, 
but one of the principal reasons why the Filipinas have small 
pelves is because the Filipinas are small in stature, and their 
pelves are in proportion to their size. In measuring the heads 
of 260 new-born babies, we found that the cephalic diameters of 
Filipino babies are smaller than those of the American. 
TABLE 1V.—Comparative measurements of heads of new-born babies 
of Filipinas and Americans. 
A Amer- eyes Differ- 
| Diameter. ican Filipino. anect 


Cm. Cm. Cm. 
Occipitomen tall 2 = s-os 8 2 eo oa es 13. 33 12.11 1.22 
Oceipitofron tal ps se see eo etn SO ee CL ee ete oad 11.70 10. 96 0. 74 
Sub-occrpitobresmatic vss ee ee ae eee ete ee Lee Ly ee ee Re 9.70 9. 28 0. 42 
Biparietalece see Uee Ke tiie.. MEU ile Ree See I NS EA as 9.25 8.63 0. 62 
Biternporale ste ye es coe Se ce eee a a as Cu ie a Oe, ow 8.00 6. 82 i oh 

This diminution in the diameters of the fcetal heads in this 
country can, of course, be accounted for by the small size of 
the pelvis of the Filipino mothers—that is, it is due to the law of 
pelvic accommodation. It is, therefore, important to bear this 
in mind, else we might be lead to resort to some drastic measures 
when we happen to have on hand a difficult case of labor in a 
Filipino patient and when we find that her pelvic measurements 
are less than those given in the textbooks. 
