Dientamoebiasis historical perspective: Difference between revisions
Created page with "__NOTOC__ {{Dientamoebiasis}} {{CMG}} {{AE}}: {{KD}} ==Overview== ==Historical Perspective== Early microbiologists reported that the organism was not pathogenic, even though..." |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
==Historical Perspective== | ==Historical Perspective== | ||
Early microbiologists reported that the organism was not pathogenic, even though six of the seven individuals from whom they isolated it were experiencing symptoms of dysentery. Their report, published in 1918, concluded the organism was not pathogenic because it consumed bacteria in culture, but did not appear to engulf red blood cells as was seen in the most well known disease causing amoeba of the time, ''[[Entamoeba histolytica]].'' This initial report may still be contributing to the reluctance of physicians to diagnose the infection. | Early microbiologists reported that the organism was not pathogenic, even though six of the seven individuals from whom they isolated it were experiencing symptoms of dysentery. Their report, published in 1918, concluded the organism was not pathogenic because it consumed bacteria in culture, but did not appear to engulf red blood cells as was seen in the most well known disease causing amoeba of the time, ''[[Entamoeba histolytica]].'' This initial report may still be contributing to the reluctance of physicians to diagnose the infection. | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
Revision as of 16:06, 27 November 2012
|
Dientamoebiasis Microchapters |
|
Diagnosis |
|---|
|
Treatment |
|
Case Studies |
|
Dientamoebiasis historical perspective On the Web |
|
American Roentgen Ray Society Images of Dientamoebiasis historical perspective |
|
Risk calculators and risk factors for Dientamoebiasis historical perspective |
Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [1] Associate Editor(s)-in-Chief: : Kalsang Dolma, M.B.B.S.[2]
Overview
Historical Perspective
Early microbiologists reported that the organism was not pathogenic, even though six of the seven individuals from whom they isolated it were experiencing symptoms of dysentery. Their report, published in 1918, concluded the organism was not pathogenic because it consumed bacteria in culture, but did not appear to engulf red blood cells as was seen in the most well known disease causing amoeba of the time, Entamoeba histolytica. This initial report may still be contributing to the reluctance of physicians to diagnose the infection.