which almost makes us decline to attempt to treat the case. That particular point was very pleasing to me, and I am much encouraged now to take on those cases that I did not like the appearance of before. Dr. J. V. Mershon, Philadelphia, Pa. I cannot let this occasion go by without expressing my appreciation of the work of Dr. Rogers. I hope he will carry it farther. I am reminded of a few records I have made in my own cases of the connection between mal-development of the bones of the face, which is sufficient to produce malocclusion, and the general mal-development of the whole child. I have made this statement on other occasions, and think if the men of this organization were to make a careful analysis of their patients, and obtain the history of their cases, they would find that where there is malocclusion to any extent we have many defects in the muscles and bones in the other parts of the body. I was hoping Dr. Rogers, in closing his paper, would express his conclusion a little differently; that he would have said orthodontia not only embraces the moving of the teeth in their relative. relations to each other, but that all the organs and all the tissues of the mouth must be restored to their normal function. Another important item which Dr. Rogers touched on, but with which he did not go quite as far as I would have liked to see him, was in expressing himself in regard to the various appliances. We have a large variety of appliances which are now in general use, but I think the ideal appliance is one which interferes the least with the normal functions of the tissues and organs of the mouth. Dr. J. A. Gorman, New Orleans, La. Dr. Rogers has given us something that will doubtless fill a long-felt want. I should like to see him perform those exercises for us, so that we could get a better idea of the movements of the muscles, especially in the exercise of the orbicularis oris. The President. I had a sort of kindergarten course with Dr. Rogers about a month ago, which rather opened my eyes. In fact, I was rather stunned at the scope it presented to my mind at the time. I think perhaps Dr. Rogers felt I was not as enthusiastic as he would have wished, but I have thought of it a good deal since that time, and have been ready for another step in this matter. I have enjoyed the paper today, even more that the rest of you, I am sure, unless you have had the privilege of hearing this matter spoken of before. Dr. Rogers (closing the discussion). I want to thank you all for the very kind way in which you have received my paper. There is much more that I might tell you, but I do not want to speak too soon. I want to be positive of the things I do for my own patients. There will be more interesting results to come later. The meeting then adjourned to 10 o'clock Tuesday morning, the Monday evening session being devoted to an informal dinner for the members and their guests, including the ladies. (To be continued.) A MONTHLY RECORD OF DENTAL SCIENCE. Devoted to the Interests of the Profession. EDWARD C. KIRK, D.D.S., Sc.D., LL.D., Editor. L. PIERCE ANTHONY, D.D.S., Associate Editor. PUBLISHED BY THE S. S. WHITE DENTAL MFG. CO., PHILADELPHia, Pa. SUBSCRIPTION PRICE, including postage, $1.00 a year to all parts of the United States, Hawaiian Islands, the Philippines, Guam, Porto Rico, Virgin Islands, Cuba, and Mexico. Canada, $1.40. To other foreign countries, $1.75 a year. Original contributions, society reports, and other correspondence intended for publication should be addressed to the EDITOR, Lock Box 1615, Philadelphia, Pa.. Subscriptions and communications relating to advertisements should be addressed to the BUSINESS MANAGER of the DENTAL COSMOS, Lock Box 1615, Philadelphia, Pa. PHILADELPHIA, OCTOBER 1918. EDITORIAL DEPARTMENT Expansion of the Army Dental Corps. WHEN the United States entered the European conflict the apportionment of dental surgeons provided by law was one-tenth of 1 per cent. of the army personnel, or one dental surgeon to each thousand men. To all who were cognizant of the facts of the situation it was clearly evident that the allotment of dental surgeons was totally inadequate for the effective care of the dental needs of the army. Basing the working capacity of a dental operator on a total of two thousand hours per year, which is a liberal estimate, and leaving no margin for loss of time, if his service were equally apportioned it would make an average of two hours annually available for each of the one thousand men under his care. Two hours per year per man is wholly insufficient for the proper care of his dental organs, and realizing that fact the dental committee of the Medical Board, Council of National Defense, took active steps toward providing a more efficient army dental service by recommending an increase in the personnel of the Dental Sur geons Corps. The seed thus sown has at last borne fruit, for announcement has just been made of an authorized increase of 100 per cent. in the personnel of the corps, so that the new ratio will be one dental surgeon to each 500 of the army personnel, with three dentists to each base hospital. We are informed that 8981 commissioned dental surgeons plus 10 per cent. for replacement will be required for active service by July 1st of next year. There are at present in round numbers 3500 dental surgeons on duty, with 2500 on the reserve inactive list, and of these latter it is probable that at least 1000 will be called to active duty. The 5500 additional dental surgeons needed to make up the quota of 10,000 required by next July will be made up by new commissions, of which it is estimated that 2500 will be obtained from conscripted dentists now in the ranks, leaving from 2000 to 3000 to be obtained from other sources. The effects of this extensive expansion of the Army Dental Surgeons Corps will be fundamental and far-reaching. The most important and basic consideration is the benefit which is wrought by this enlargement in the personnel to the morale of the corps itself. There can hardly be any factor which exerts a more demoralizing influence on the character of an individual than to place him in a position where he is expected to produce results that he knows to be, in the nature of the circumstances, impossible of accomplishment. It is precisely that kind of situation in which the army dental surgeon has been placed when he has been required to look after the dental needs of 1000 men-a task which no one can do properly, and involving the inevitable result that it is done improperly, or to a considerable degree it is not done at all; there is no other alternative. The result so far as the dental care of our soldiers is concerned is obviously that they could not receive the full measure of dental attention they require, for which reason, though valuable as far as it went, the army dental service under the old apportionment necessarily fell far short of what it could be and should be. The new allotment will go far toward correcting these fundamental evils, and will place dental service in the army in a position where it can practically demonstrate its value and importance in maintaining the physical efficiency of our fighting men. Another important result of the new order will be its reflex effect upon dental educational activities in the immediate future. It is highly questionable whether the large additional number of army dental surgeons required by July next can all be drawn from the body of dental surgeons now in civil life. A fair proportion will be needed to care for the needs of the civilian population, and there are even now no more than a sufficient number for that purpose. The main reliance of the Government will therefore have to be upon the classes that will graduate at the close of the current session of the dental schools. And in order to secure a sufficient body of graduates to meet both army and civilian needs it seems inevitable that a considerable body of students will have to be recruited from the present draft quota and assigned to dental educational institutions, under army regulations, to pursue the dental course. Such a correlation of military training and dental education under government regulation has much to recommend it as a disciplinary system both for the mind and for the body. Not the least of its advantages will be the opportunity that it will afford to substitute something really useful in the dental curriculum for that academic mongrel called "dental rhetoric," whatever that may be, which someone has apparently succeeded in impinging upon the standardized dental curriculum recently authorized by the Dental Educational Council of America. We have endeavored herein to present merely the main elements of this important development, and will keep our readers informed regarding the detailed changes and regulations as they arise from the practical applications which the new order will necessarily involve. Classification of Dental Schools. THE following is the formal classification of dental schools as adopted by the Dental Educational Council of America, at Chicago, Ill., July 31, 1918: Class A. Creighton University, College of Dentistry, Omaha, Nebraska. Marquette University, College of Dentistry, Milwaukee, Wis. Medical College of Virginia, School of Dentistry, Richmond, Va. [VOL. LX.-64] North Pacific Dental College, Portland, Oregon. Ohio State University, College of Dentistry, Columbus, Ohio. The Thomas W. Evans Museum and Dental Institute, University of Pennsylvania. Tufts Dental College, Boston, Mass. University of California, College of Dentistry, San Francisco, Cal. Class B. Colorado College of Dental Surgery, Denver, Colo. Georgetown University, School of Dentistry, Washington, D. C. Louisville University, College of Dentistry, Louisville, Ky. Loyola University, School of Dentistry, New Orleans, La. University of Buffalo, Dental Department, Buffalo, N. Y. New York College of Dentistry, New York. College of Dental and Oral Surgery of New York. Western Reserve University, Dental School, Cleveland, Ohio. Philadelphia Dental College, Philadelphia, Pa. Vanderbilt University, School of Dentistry, Nashville, Tenn. George Washington University, Dental School, Washington, D. C. College of Physicians and Surgeons, Dental Dept., San Francisco, Cal. Baylor University, Dental Department, Dallas, Texas. Class C. Lincoln Dental College, Lincoln, Nebraska. College of Jersey City, N. J. Cincinnati College of Dental Surgery, Cincinnati, Ohio. |