Stolt C M
Sven Med Tidskr. 1999;3(1):249-70.
This paper is an analysis of the decision to award the Nobel Price to Egas Moniz 1949. His method prefrontal leucotomy was introduced in 1936. Before that he made an important contribution to medicine by introducing angiography of the brain vessels. He was suggested to the Nobel Price several times: 1928, 1933, 1937, 1944 and finally 1949. In the judgement of his scientific work the neurosurgeon Herbert Olivecrona 1937 avoided to discuss leucotomy. In 1944 Essen-Moller had critical comments to the orginal work of leucotomy by Moniz, especially the short follow-up and the poorly defined patient-material. When Olivecrona 1949 made a new review, he suggested that Moniz should be awarded the Nobel Price. What had changed from 1944? In front of all: the experience of the method all over the world had increased significant, and therefore Olivecrona now found it suitable to give the price to Moniz. He did not at all discuss the philosophical and ethical perspectives of the method.
本文是对1949年授予埃加斯·莫尼斯诺贝尔生理学或医学奖这一决定的分析。他的前额叶白质切断术于1936年被引入。在此之前，他通过引入脑血管造影术为医学做出了重要贡献。他多次被提名诺贝尔生理学或医学奖：1928年、1933年、1937年、1944年，最终在1949年获奖。在对他的科学工作进行评判时，神经外科医生赫伯特·奥利维克罗纳在1937年回避讨论白质切断术。1944年，埃森 - 莫勒对莫尼斯白质切断术的原始工作提出了批评意见，特别是随访时间短和患者材料界定不清的问题。当奥利维克罗纳在1949年进行新的评估时，他建议授予莫尼斯诺贝尔生理学或医学奖。从1944年到1949年发生了什么变化呢？首先，世界各地对该方法的经验显著增加，因此奥利维克罗纳现在认为授予莫尼斯该奖项是合适的。他根本没有讨论该方法的哲学和伦理层面。
