Paper - Teratological studies (1919)

From Embryology
Revision as of 18:47, 16 August 2019 by Z8600021 (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Header}} {{Ref-Carey1919}} {| class="wikitable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed" ! Online Editor   |- | 90px|left This historic 1916 paper by Carey de...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Embryology - 18 Oct 2019    Facebook link Pinterest link Twitter link  Expand to Translate  
Google Translate - select your language from the list shown below (this will open a new external page)

العربية | català | 中文 | 中國傳統的 | français | Deutsche | עִברִית | हिंदी | bahasa Indonesia | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | မြန်မာ | Pilipino | Polskie | português | ਪੰਜਾਬੀ ਦੇ | Română | русский | Español | Swahili | Svensk | ไทย | Türkçe | اردو | ייִדיש | Tiếng Việt    These external translations are automated and may not be accurate. (More? About Translations)

Carey EJ. Teratological Studies (1919) Anat. Rec. 16(2): 45-70.

Online Editor  
Mark Hill.jpg
This historic 1916 paper by Carey describes examples of human embryo spina bifida. The term "monster" is the historic term for gross developmental abnormalities and is no longer used and is also offensive. It has been left within this text as this is how such major abnormalities were medically referred at that time, and I apologise for any offence to the reader that use of this term may cause.



Modern Pages: neural abnormalities

Historic Disclaimer - information about historic embryology pages 
Mark Hill.jpg
Pages where the terms "Historic Textbook" and "Historic Embryology" appear on this site, and sections within pages where this disclaimer appears, indicate that the content and scientific understanding are specific to the time of publication. This means that while some scientific descriptions are still accurate, the terminology and interpretation of the developmental mechanisms reflect the understanding at the time of original publication and those of the preceding periods, these terms and interpretations may not reflect our current scientific understanding.     (More? Embryology History | Historic Embryology Papers)