In Reply: A New Syndrome? Or Galactosemia?

We appreciate and agree with many of the comments of Dr. Ruth Harris. As pointed out in the article,1 the first patient was seen in 1950 and the second in 1954. We believe that galactosemia was ruled out by the negative Benedict's test of the urine of both siblings–the most practical technique...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Pediatrics (Evanston) 1973-10, Vol.52 (4), p.622-622
Hauptverfasser: Wadlington, W. B., Riley, Harris D.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:We appreciate and agree with many of the comments of Dr. Ruth Harris. As pointed out in the article,1 the first patient was seen in 1950 and the second in 1954. We believe that galactosemia was ruled out by the negative Benedict's test of the urine of both siblings–the most practical technique available at that time. The Clinistix reagent strips were not introduced until 1956. In regard to her point about measuring galastose-1-phosphate uridyl transferase, it was pointed out in the article that there are now many other measurements which would be desirable in these patients which were not available at the time the patients were seen.
ISSN:0031-4005
1098-4275
DOI:10.1542/peds.52.4.622