This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Thomas E. Feasby, MD, FRCP(C)
Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences Division of Neurology, Room 70P27 University Hospital PO Box 5339 Postal Station A London, Ontario, Canada N6A 5A5

Arch Neurol. 1984;41(9):915.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Letters to the editor should be submitted as an original and two duplicates. They should be typewritten doublespaced on plain bond paper; they will be subject to editing. If they are prepared on a word processor, do not justify the right margin. A copyright transmittal letter signed by all authors must accompany this (see "Instructions for Authors").

To the Editor.

—In the course of technologic advance, the bleeding bowl and the leech have been replaced by plasmapheresis. The rationale of each is much the same: to remove some "evil humor", or, in modern terms, presumed antibodies or immune complexes. The truth is, that in most instances plasmapheresis has been used without firm evidence of what the "evil humor" really is. Further studies of those human disorders for which plasmapheresis proves effective and of their animal models may clarify the nature of these circulating factors. Identification of specific antibodies and antigens . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?