| JOURNAL HOME | CME HOME | THIS MONTH | PAST ISSUES | ETOC | COLLECTIONS |
| AUTHORS | REVIEWERS | EDITORIAL BOARD | FEEDBACK | RSS | HELP |
| ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Health Sciences Center, University of Missouri-Columbia Hospital and Clinics, Columbia, MO
To the Editor:
The letter by Benumof (1) focused primarily on evolutionary theory to explain thyromental distance and difficult endotracheal intubation.
Ernst Haeckel propounded the theory of embryonic recapitulation in 1866. His conclusion, as Dr. Benumof correctly noted, was "Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny." However, Haeckel lacked evidence supporting his views so he fraudulently changed some of the drawings of other scientists in order to increase the resemblance between species and to hide dissimilarities. Haeckel’s deception was exposed by one of his peers (Wilhelm His, Sr.) in 1874, and Haeckel himself admitted such in 1909 (2).
Unfortunately, Haeckel’s recapitulation theory is still taught is biology and embryology courses in our educational process. That such a theory would be promoted as a defense of the American Society of Anesthesiologists Difficult Airway Algorithm is difficult to understand. For their part, Drs. Chou and Wu should be commended for documenting scientific evidence for difficult airways (3).
References
Department of Anesthesiology, UCSD Medical Center, San Diego, CA
In Response:
First, although Ernst Haeckel apparently changed some drawings of other scientists (reference 2 in Dr. Worth’s letter), I cannot believe that the entire disciplines of biology and embryology are currently completely wrong on the "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" fact. Perhaps Dr. Worth has never seen modern images of the anatomic equivalent of fish gills in the developing human fetus.
Second, I never "defended" the American Society of Anesthesiologists Difficult Airway Algorithm with the "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny" theory. Such an assertion is flat-out wrong.
Third, it is irresponsible of the Editor of Anesthesia and Analgesia to publish such an unlikely valid letter (with respect to the educational process of other entire disciplines) and definitely inaccurate letter (with respect to what I said).
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
