Are you having difficulty reading an article due its font size? In order to make the content on PEP-Web larger (zoom in), press Ctrl (on Windows) or ⌘Command (on the Mac) and the plus sign (+). Press Ctrl (on Windows) or ⌘Command (on the Mac) and the minus sign (-) to make the content smaller (zoom out). To go back to 100% size (normal size), press Ctrl (⌘Command on the Mac) + 0 (the number 0).
Another way on Windows: Hold the Ctrl key and scroll the mouse wheel up or down to zoom in and out (respectively) of the webpage. Laptop users may use two fingers and separate them or bring them together while pressing the mouse track pad.
Safari users: You can also improve the readability of you browser when using Safari, with the Reader Mode: Go to PEP-Web. Right-click the URL box and select Settings for This Website, or go to Safari > Settings for This Website. A large pop-up will appear underneath the URL box. Look for the header that reads, “When visiting this website.” If you want Reader mode to always work on this site, check the box for “Use Reader when available.”
For the complete list of tips, see PEP-Web Tips on the PEP-Web support page.
Jelliffe, S.E. (1940). American Medicine. Expert Testimony out of Court: By Esther Everett Lape, et al. New York: The American Foundation, 1937, 2 vols., 678 pp. and 757 pp.. Psychoanal Q., 9:121-123.
(1940). Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 9:121-123
American Medicine. Expert Testimony out of Court: By Esther Everett Lape, et al. New York: The American Foundation, 1937, 2 vols., 678 pp. and 757 pp.
Review by: Smith Ely Jelliffe
Here in 1435 pages, in two bindings, is offered a chosen series of answers which 2100 physicians of the United States made to a general questionnaire concerning what is right or wrong in the practice of medicine, as limited or circumscribed by the questionnaires in question.
The questionnaires in general dealt with standards of education, adequacy of treatment, improved methods of therapy, problems of fees, costs, hospital and other agencies, etc., all with a certain bias towards some sort of state medicine, using the term in its widest application. At least for the present reviewer this general ideology is seen throughout the inquiry. It is merely raised as a problem however and not insisted on as a solution.
The work is so large and deals with so many generalizations derived from other generalizations that it defies any further generalization which a reviewer, apart from his own bias, might hope to set down in these pages for a special class of readers. Can any generalization be formulated, for instance, concerning what is adequate therapy? Of what, of whom, by whom, under what circumstances? No number of answers to such a general mode of approach, we submit, can amount to anything.
[This is a summary or excerpt from the full text of the book or article. The full text of the document is available to subscribers.]