PubMed · 15421127
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
F HOFF. 1950-04-14. [Herbert Assmann].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15421127/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Early examples of intentional human cranial deformation predate written history. Intentional cranial deformation as an extreme has seemingly not persisted into this century. However, mild forms of this manipulation are still practiced by various groups worldwide. Accidental cranial deformation or mild forms of intentional cranial deformation may be encountered by the clinician or anatomist. We review the literature regarding intentional manipulation of the human cranium.
BACKGROUND/METHODS: Nils Andreas Quisling was born in Telemark, Norway, in 1854 and became an obstetrician. In 1893 he published a monograph on neonatal jaundice. This monograph was studied and compared with other published sources from the same time period. RESULTS: Quisling discussed four theories on the cause of neonatal jaundice. "Suppression jaundice" held that jaundice was the result of suppressed liver function. "Haematogenous jaundice" claimed that bilirubin was formed from haemoglobin outside the liver, and had nothing to do with the liver. "Polycholia" held that neonatal jaundice was due to an increased secretion of all the constituents of bile. Quisling rejected these and supported the "hepatogenous" theory-jaundice was always a liver-related phenomenon. He described 50 cases of neonatal jaundice. The incidence of neonatal jaundice at the Kristiania Maternity Foundation was 26%. In Quisling's cases, gastrointestinal disturbances were common, and he felt this to be an under-reported complication of neonatal jaundice. He found that neonatal jaundice was often accompanied by fever. CONCLUSION: Gastrointestinal disturbances were causally involved in neonatal jaundice, resulting in impeded bile drainage. At the time of Quisling's study (1887), this "hepatogenous" theory of neonatal jaundice probably still had majority support in the European literature.
The first Norwegian factory inspection act was passed in 1892. Until 1931, little attention was paid to occupational lead poisoning. In 1915 the physician Olai Lorange (1876-1965) was appointed chief of the factory inspectorate. In 1916 he initiated a registration of lead poisoning in Norway. In 1920 he also called on Norwegian doctors to report diseases considered to be of occupational origin. The results were scanty. Attention was paid to occupational lead poisoning in a draft legislation put forward in 1923. However, the motion was not put to vote during the depression after the First World War and was not passed until 1936. Historically, lead exposure has in periods been forgotten as a cause of disease, only to reappear. In Norway, occupational lead poisoning attracted attention in 1931-33, when 46 cases were reported from a shipyard. The inspectorate laid down regulations and the government granted compensations and pensions to 40 of the workers. Based on worker protection acts and regulations, yearbooks from the factory inspectorate, and medical literature, the article describes attitudes towards occupational lead poisoning in the early years after the first Norwegian factory inspection act was implemented.