1368

are classically far more red-cell precursors. However, it was afeature of the published cases in which there was confusion inthe diagnosis.1,2 It seems likely that the excess of white-cellprecursors is due to concomitant iron deficiency.5The patient was later shown to have malabsorption of

sugars, fat, and vitamin B12, and the small-bowel-biopsyappearances were compatible with a diagnosis of tropicalsprue. She is now fully recovered following folic acid,B12’ and tetracycline therapy.

I am grateful to Dr. J. Verrier Jones for permission to report acase under his care, and to him and Dr. F. J. W. Lewis for helpfuldiscussions.

Department of Medicine and PathologySouthmead Hospital,Bristol BS10 5NB. T. J. HAMBLIN.

SCIENCE AND NON-SCIENCE

SIR,-Dr. Eliot Slater’s lecture advocating the exclusionof psychoanalysis from scientific medicine was given at theInstitute of Psychiatry-an institute of the University ofLondon. There is indeed much to be said against grantingpsychoanalysis a place in a university’s faculty of medicine.But it has always seemed strange to me that, though it hasbeen studied for many years, psychoanalysis has never beenaccorded a place in the universities. After all, many anunscientific subject does have a place in university studies.What has happened in the past is that, since psycho-

analysis involves so much difficult and delicate handling ofdisturbed people, the doctors have said, " Only doctorsshould do this". And then, when the psychoanalysts havedone their best to make their ranks as medically qualifiedas possible, the doctors have said, " We do not want youhere; you are unscientific". So it might be a good thingto found a department of psychoanalysis, staffed by doctors,in the faculty of arts of a university, where they couldwork independently of the faculty of medicine. Doctors

practising psychoanalysis in such a setting might findtheir colleagues in other departments of the faculty of artsmore appreciative, informed, informative, and stimulatingthan their medical colleagues. They might even eventuallybe able to make a contribution to scientific medicine.

GORDON BANCROFT.

5. Lowenstein, L., Brunton, L., Hsieh, Y. S. Can. med. Ass. J. 1966,94, 636.

AppointmentsSHAW, J. D., M.B. Sheff., F.R.C.S., F.R.C.S.E. : consultant E.N.T. surgeon,

United Sheffield Hospitals.TEARE, H. D., M.B. Cantab.: medical superintendent, King Edward VII

Hospital, Sussex.

Liverpool Regional Hospital Board:HARLEY, ALEXANDER, M.B. Cantab., M.R.C.P.: consultant cardiologist,

South Liverpool hospital group.JONES, N., B.sc., M.R.C.S., D.M.R.D.: consultant radiologist, East and

South Liverpool hospital groups.PRIDEAUX, P. R., M.B. L’pool., F.F.A. R.C.S.: consultant ansthetist,

Broadgreen and Aintree hospitals.

South West Metropolitan Regional Hospital Board:BAYNE, MARY K., M.B. Dubl., F.F.A. R.c.s., D.A.: consultant anaesthetist,

Croydon and Warlingham hospital group.FARRINGTON, G. H., M.B. Leeds, F.R.C.S. : consultant surgeon, Kingston

and Long Grove hospital group.FOLEY, T. H., M.B., B.SC. Lond., M.R.C.P. : consultant physician,

Guildford and Godalming hospital group.GODDARD, P. F., M.B. Lond., M.R.C.PATH.: consultant in chemical

pathology, Epsom and West Park hospital group.GRANT, M. E., M.B. N.U.I., D.P.M.: consultant in mental subnormality,

Royal Earlswood hospital group.McGRATH, JAMES, M.B. N.U.I., M.R.C.O.G., F.R.C.S. : consultant obste-

trician and gynecologist, Kingston and Long Grove hospitalgroup.

NOTLEY, R. G., M.B. Lond., F.R.C.S. : consultant surgeon, Guildfordand Godalming hospital group.

Parliament

Tobacco and Snuff Bill

Sir GERALD NABARRO asked leave to bring in the Tobaccoand Snuff (Health Hazards) Bill. He said that two previousBills with a similar intent had failed through lack of

Parliamentary time, but this one was both a stronger anda wider Bill than either of its predecessors. Three importantrestrictions would be imposed under the Bill. A " bold,graphic and lurid health warning " would have to be

printed on the exterior of all containers and packets ofcigarettes and tobacco products, including snuff. Snuffwas included simply because it was a tobacco product, eventhough there might be no hazard to health in its use. Ifthe majority of informed opinion outside and inside theHouse decided specifically to exclude snuff at a futurestage of the Bill, then he would, of course, submit. Thesecond measure proposed in the Bill was to have printedon the outside of all containers of tobacco products thepoison content of the manufactured tobacco itself, notablythe tar and nicotine. The third provision, which mightbe introduced into the Bill in Committee if the Governmentsupported the measure, but not otherwise, was a total banon all advertising by all media of all tobacco products. Itwas generally believed that this was an acceptable meansof containing and eventually restricting the consumptionof tobacco, especially in the form of cigarettes. Thesemeasures were necessary to counteract the evil influenceof tobacco consumption on human health; about 100,000people died each year as a direct or indirect result oftobacco consumption. It had been calculated that the costof treatment of a patient with lung cancer, including carein hospital before death, was at least E1000. These casestherefore accounted for an expenditure of E100 millionby the Health Service, approximately 5% of the N.H.S.Vote. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had a vestedinterest in the consumption of tobacco: tobacco dutyamounted to El 160 million this year. But human healthin Britain was more important than current revenue. TheBill was supported by 11 other members, 4 of them doctors.Mr. MARCUS LIPTON, opposing the Motion, said that he

had to declare an interest. He was an honorary member ofthe Society of Snuff Grinders, Blenders, and Purveyors.There was no evidence whatsoever that snuff-taking washarmful; it had no tar content. However, he would notpress his opposition, on the undertaking that all referenceto snuff would be excluded from the Bill when, if ever, itwas dealt with in Committee. The Bill was given a formalfirst reading.

QUESTION TIME

Welfare Orange juiceIn reply to a question on the possible harmful effects on

children’s teeth of welfare orange juice, Sir KEITH JOSEPH,Secretary of State for Social Services, said that the Depart-ment was aware of the danger of the misuse of undilutedfruit syrups, and had decided to place no further contractsfor welfare orange juice. It would cease to be available bythe end of 1971. Cod-liver oil, which was also suppliedunder the welfare foods service, was unpalatable to somechildren, and unpopular with their mothers. Welfareorange juice and cod-liver oil would, therefore, be replacedby a new preparation containing vitamins A, D, and C tobe administered in the form of drops. Expectant and nurs-ing mothers, who were at present entitled to vitamin A andD tablets and orange juice, would in future be given vita-mins A, D, and C in single-tablet form. The necessaryorder would be made early in the new year.