Abstract
very successful. In his book on the principles of surgical care, Blalock stated that most of the attempts have confused rather than clarified the subject (1). As he pointed out, several authorities have suggested that the difficulty would be overcome by abandoning the attempt to define shock and providing instead a clinical picture of the syndrome. In a recent editorial, I tried to carry Dr. Blalock's reasoning one step further and proposed that we give up the word altogether (2). That suggestion was followed in revising an interns' and residents' manual called Surgical Procedures of the Henry Ford Hospital(3). first edition, published in 1940, contained a ten-page chapter on The Treatpment of Shock. In the 1946 edition we omitted this chapter and incorporated the following paragraph in the foreword:
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 call
