Abstract
The adoption of workman's compensation legislation in this country and abroad has brought to the fore an ever increasing number of petitions for compensation, the claim being made that a local injury is responsible for the subsequent development of a malignant growth in the part affected. During the past decade, surgeons and pathologists in general have altered their views in regard to trauma and malignancy, now accepting the causal relationship. Many judicial opinions have been rendered in favor of the issue and the causal relationship is accepted by courts and compensation bureaus everywhere. That there are dissenters from this view is attested by the opinion of Dandy,1who stated that, since sarcoma had never been produced experimentally by trauma, he did not think that injury had any bearing on either its cause or increased propagation. It is significant to observe that in this instance the commissioner ruled for the
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
