February 18, 1957
My dear Dr. Wangensteen:
I have in hand your letter of February 7th. I have read it over and have given some thought to the ideas which you express. I also have come to wonder about the Kay-Blalock paper. I think that it is probably true that this is not the sort of thing that really belongs in the Reappraisal Section and would be very pleased to send word along to Dr. Kay that such is the case, with the suggestion that he submit the paper independently. If you think it should be included later on, it could, of course, be so included after the pattern of the Reappraisal Section has been established. I am inclined to agree, however, that it does not belong in this Section at all.
I have been very uneasy about the apparent competition between Warren Cole's Section and ours and agree that every precaution should be taken to avoid such competition or even the appearance of such competition.
The suggestion that your paper and John Lewis' go into the April issue seems appropriate to me and I see no reason why this should not be the pattern. It does seem to me that the place of refrigeration in cardiac surgery is sufficiently contested to justify inclusion of Lewis' paper. I am somewhat skeptical, however, about the wisdom of asking Dick Varco to contribute a paper to this Section having to do with the use of the pump-oxygenator. This, it seems to me, does not rest upon the controversial ground that the refrigeration technique does. Dick is pondering at the moment whether he should prepare such a paper or not, and I would appreciate your advice as to the wisdom of inclusion of such a paper in this Section.
The papers that go to you not re-edited at all. They have been re-typed in order that this office might retain a copy in case anything is lost in the mail. The freshly re-typed copy with a carbon copy of same are what are sent to you and Mrs. Avis respectively. I, myself, would resent it very much if somebody undertook to re-edit something which I had submitted and I do not feel it is appropriate for us to do so.
I shall be able to fill you in fully with regard to detailed plans for your long-awaited visit to Brooklyn sometime in the course of the next four weeks. Philip Price is here this week and he and I are both hopeful that his visit will result in a real improvement in our infection rate in the operating rooms. There is much missionary work to be done.
I saw a great many of your associates at the University Surgeons meeting last week in Columbus and certainly missed seeing you there also. All of them seem to be thoroughly pervaded with a very wholesome degree of skepticism about almost everything.
My best to you and to Sally and Eleanor joins me in looking forward to the time of your forthcoming visit.
Very sincerely yours,
Clarence Dennis, M.D.
Associate Editor
Surgery