• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

[母亲的想象力与先天性畸形]

[Maternal imagination and congenital malformations].

作者信息

Van Heiningen Teunis Willem

出版信息

Hist Sci Med. 2011 Jul-Sep;45(3):239-48.

PMID:22073754
Abstract

Since antiquity philosophers and scientists tried to explain the cause of congenital malformations. In early modern medicine maternal imagination was largely accepted as their true cause, This concept was rejected by Blondel, a London physician. Around 1750 Wolff introduced the Hemmungsbildung as the cause of congenital malformations, a concept adopted in 1781 by Blumenbach. Later on Soemmerring (1784), Crichton (1785) and Meckel the younger adopted Blumenbach's concept. In 1824 Suringar further developed it. More and more the excessive development of fetal blood vessels or nerves was rejected as a possible cause, although from time to time these ideas were adopted again. In the early 1800s Etienne Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire (1811) and Vrolik (1817) developed a classification of monstra. These attempts urged Isidore Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire (Etienne's son) and Vrolik the younger (Gerard's son) to develop it further. Nevertheless, around 1840 Vrolik had to admit that although we are well acqainted with the various malformations, we are still ignorant of the primary cause of these phenomena. Meanwhile the dispute between the adherents of the theory of preformation and those who had adopted the concept of epigenesis exercised many minds. In the second half of the eighteenth century the latter theory became more and more adopted and this fact cleared the way for the ideas introduced by Wolff and Blumenbach, because it was consistent with the idea of a gradual development of fetal structures.

摘要

自古以来,哲学家和科学家们就试图解释先天性畸形的成因。在近代早期医学中,母体想象在很大程度上被视为其真正原因,这一概念被伦敦医生布隆代尔所否定。大约在1750年,沃尔夫提出“抑制形成”是先天性畸形的原因,1781年布卢门巴赫采纳了这一概念。后来,泽梅林(1784年)、克里顿(1785年)和小梅克尔采纳了布卢门巴赫的概念。1824年,叙林加对其进行了进一步发展。作为一种可能的原因,胎儿血管或神经的过度发育越来越多地遭到否定,尽管这些观点不时会再次被采纳。在19世纪初,艾蒂安·若弗鲁瓦·圣伊莱尔(1811年)和弗罗利克(1817年)对怪胎进行了分类。这些尝试促使伊西多尔·若弗鲁瓦·圣伊莱尔(艾蒂安之子)和小弗罗利克(热拉尔之子)对其进一步发展。然而,大约在1840年,弗罗利克不得不承认,尽管我们对各种畸形非常熟悉,但我们仍然不知道这些现象的主要原因。与此同时,预成论的支持者和采纳渐成论概念的人之间的争论困扰着许多人。在18世纪下半叶,后一种理论越来越被采纳,这一事实为沃尔夫和布卢门巴赫提出的观点扫清了道路,因为它与胎儿结构逐渐发育的观点相一致。

相似文献

1
[Maternal imagination and congenital malformations].[母亲的想象力与先天性畸形]
Hist Sci Med. 2011 Jul-Sep;45(3):239-48.
2
Neglected ancestors: Etienne and Isidore Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire.被忽视的先辈:艾蒂安和伊西多尔·若弗鲁瓦·圣伊莱尔。
Paleopathol Newsl. 2001 Dec(116):17-21.
3
Étienne Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire as a predecessor of the epigenetic concept of evolution.Étienne Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire 作为进化的表观遗传概念的先驱。
Biosystems. 2021 Dec;210:104571. doi: 10.1016/j.biosystems.2021.104571. Epub 2021 Nov 4.
4
[Etienne Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire (1772-1844) and anencephaly: Contribution of one naturalist to medical knowledge].[艾蒂安·若弗鲁瓦·圣伊莱尔(1772 - 1844)与无脑畸形:一位博物学家对医学知识的贡献]
Hist Sci Med. 2004 Jul-Sep;38(3):365-83.
5
[Teratology "from Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire to the present"].[从若弗鲁瓦·圣伊莱尔到现代的畸形学]
Bull Assoc Anat (Nancy). 1996 Mar;80(248):17-31.
6
The contribution of new findings and ideas to the old principles of teratology.新发现和新观点对致畸学旧有原则的贡献。
Reprod Toxicol. 2005 Sep-Oct;20(3):295-300. doi: 10.1016/j.reprotox.2005.03.011.
7
[Isidore Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire (1805-1861)].[伊西多尔·若弗鲁瓦·圣伊莱尔(1805 - 1861)]
Acta Belg Hist Med. 1993 Dec;6(4):224-5.
8
Meckel on developmental pathology.梅克尔论发育病理学。
Am J Med Genet A. 2006 Jan 15;140(2):115-28. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.a.31043.
9
Birth defects before epigenesis.表观遗传学之前的出生缺陷。
Clin Genet. 2008 Oct;74(4):338-42. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-0004.2008.01020.x. Epub 2008 Jun 28.
10
Historical aspects of the study of malformations in The Netherlands.荷兰畸形研究的历史概况。
Am J Med Genet. 1998 May 1;77(2):91-9.