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?

Kenneth D. Pool, MD; Terese Finitzo, PhD; Michael D. Devous, Sr, PhD; Ben C. Watson, PhD; Frances J. Freeman, PhD
Neuroscience Center Methodist Medical Center PO Box 655999 Beckley at Colorado Dallas, TX 75265

Arch Neurol. 1993;50(12):1289-1290.

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

In reply

Fox et al raise several issues—some of valid concern. Since Fox and Ingham were provided with extensive documentation on our research (including the studies in question) in a 1990 visit to our laboratories, they are better informed than the average reader. They have reviewed materials and data not yet in publication which address their concerns and demonstrate that these pose no substantial threat to the validity of our findings. While much of this response to their letter will be redundant to Fox et al, we appreciate an opportunity to address these issues in this broader, public forum. We will consider issues in the order in which they were raised by Fox et al: (1) absolute flow findings; (2) relative flow findings; and (3) other methodologic concerns.

Fox et al assert that, "the most important finding of the regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) data in stuttering is the global . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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