ably induced by "certain of our subjects." Other data described orgasms in young males that were "timed with second hand or stopwatch," and still other "experiments" reportedly lasted up to 24 hours and yielded up to 26 orgasms. Many of the subjects of these experiments were obviously too young to have given consent to these remarkable procedures. The details of the experiments are not given, nor is there a word of concern by Kinsey or his coauthors for possible consequences to the subjects. It appears that no follow-up was attempted. I hope that these circumstances will raise ethical and factual concerns on the part of the scientific community. Langford contents himself with the statement that Kinsey "might even have obfuscated a little" and glibly reaches the conclusion that "Kinsey's work was flawed but not fraud." I see no factual basis for such a conclusion at present. Also disturbing is Langford's focus on the motives of Muir and the authors. What is relevant first is not the motivation of those bringing allegations but, rather, the evidence that they advance. I find the evidence, part of which is summarized above, compelling since it comes directly from Kinsey's book. I find it disturbing and believe it requires investigation. Walter W. Stewart Department of Health and Human Services National Institutes of Health Bethesda, Md.
[Dr. Langford responds.] Walter Stewart states his case in a more reasoned way than do the authors of the book. However, he now amplifies his original statement by referring to Kinsey's data on child sexuality as "experi-
820
CAN MED ASSOC J 1992; 146 (6)
ments," something for which there is no direct evidence in the Kinsey reports. I agree with Stewart that we should focus on clear evidence rather than imputed motivation; however, the book itself focuses on motivation by claiming that Kinsey falsified data to promote his "grand scheme." Stewart and Muir are convinced of their cause. From my interpretation of the data I can only agree to disagree with them.
small container in a pocket or purse. This method employs the enzymes glucose oxidase and potassium iodide, which change colour when exposed to various concentrations of glucose. Coke Classic served in 355-mL cans contains 182.28 kJ (43.40 kcal) per 100 mL as compared with 1.76 kJ (0.42 kcal) per 100 mL for the diet version (in which virtually all the energy derives from carbohydrates). The use of Diastix (Ames E. Robert Langford, MD, CM, DPH Division of Miles Canada Inc., Associate professor of community Etobicoke, Ont.) allows Coke and health and family medicine diet Coke to be easily distinguishFaculty of Medicine ed. The diet beverage does not University of Toronto Toronto, Ont. change the colour of the pale blue reagent paper, whereas the regular drink changes it to deep brown, corresponding approximately to a Diet Coke or not? 1% to 2% glucose solution. This reaction is reproducible and has F a or thousands of insulin- been found to distinguish other dependent and non-insulin- regular and diet carbonated soft dependent diabetic patients drinks, such as Pepsi, ginger ale, striving for tight glycemic control, 7UP, Sprite and root beer. accurate knowledge of their serum The dipsticks are easily availglucose levels, their daily energy able, and the test is inexpensive intake and the sugar content of and rapid and may be performed the foods and beverages they con- discreetly. sume is vital. At home these patients can Anthony Ralph-Edwards, MD easily control their energy intake, Mervyn Deitel, MD and they know the sugar content Frances H. Deitel, MA Joseph's Health Centre of the foods they consume, but St. University of Toronto the task is somewhat more dif- Toronto, Ont. ficult when they are eating out. Since being introduced several years ago diet carbonated beverages have become a routine Thinking about moving part of the diet of many people south? with diabetes. Since restaurants T n he second sentence in the often do not serve beverages in cans but make them up from third paragraph of Dr. marketed syrups, patients are Gerald I. Goldlist's letter sometimes presented with nondiet (Can Med Assoc J 1992; 146: 332) drinks in error. should have read, with the We have found that diet car- changes in italics: "We interns bonated beverages can be easily were the intravenous (IV) night distinguished from their sugar- team and saved the hospital from containing counterparts with the paying one shift of IV nurses." We use of urine glucose dipsticks, apologize for any confusion the which may be carried in their omission may have caused. - Ed.
[correctioni
LE 15 MARS 1992
[Dr. Langford responds.] Walter Stewart states his case in a more reasoned way than do the authors of the book. However, he now amplifies his original statement by referring to Kinsey's data on child sexuality as "experi-
820
CAN MED ASSOC J 1992; 146 (6)
ments," something for which there is no direct evidence in the Kinsey reports. I agree with Stewart that we should focus on clear evidence rather than imputed motivation; however, the book itself focuses on motivation by claiming that Kinsey falsified data to promote his "grand scheme." Stewart and Muir are convinced of their cause. From my interpretation of the data I can only agree to disagree with them.
small container in a pocket or purse. This method employs the enzymes glucose oxidase and potassium iodide, which change colour when exposed to various concentrations of glucose. Coke Classic served in 355-mL cans contains 182.28 kJ (43.40 kcal) per 100 mL as compared with 1.76 kJ (0.42 kcal) per 100 mL for the diet version (in which virtually all the energy derives from carbohydrates). The use of Diastix (Ames E. Robert Langford, MD, CM, DPH Division of Miles Canada Inc., Associate professor of community Etobicoke, Ont.) allows Coke and health and family medicine diet Coke to be easily distinguishFaculty of Medicine ed. The diet beverage does not University of Toronto Toronto, Ont. change the colour of the pale blue reagent paper, whereas the regular drink changes it to deep brown, corresponding approximately to a Diet Coke or not? 1% to 2% glucose solution. This reaction is reproducible and has F a or thousands of insulin- been found to distinguish other dependent and non-insulin- regular and diet carbonated soft dependent diabetic patients drinks, such as Pepsi, ginger ale, striving for tight glycemic control, 7UP, Sprite and root beer. accurate knowledge of their serum The dipsticks are easily availglucose levels, their daily energy able, and the test is inexpensive intake and the sugar content of and rapid and may be performed the foods and beverages they con- discreetly. sume is vital. At home these patients can Anthony Ralph-Edwards, MD easily control their energy intake, Mervyn Deitel, MD and they know the sugar content Frances H. Deitel, MA Joseph's Health Centre of the foods they consume, but St. University of Toronto the task is somewhat more dif- Toronto, Ont. ficult when they are eating out. Since being introduced several years ago diet carbonated beverages have become a routine Thinking about moving part of the diet of many people south? with diabetes. Since restaurants T n he second sentence in the often do not serve beverages in cans but make them up from third paragraph of Dr. marketed syrups, patients are Gerald I. Goldlist's letter sometimes presented with nondiet (Can Med Assoc J 1992; 146: 332) drinks in error. should have read, with the We have found that diet car- changes in italics: "We interns bonated beverages can be easily were the intravenous (IV) night distinguished from their sugar- team and saved the hospital from containing counterparts with the paying one shift of IV nurses." We use of urine glucose dipsticks, apologize for any confusion the which may be carried in their omission may have caused. - Ed.
[correctioni
LE 15 MARS 1992
