SinÉty, Louis de, 10, Rue de la Chaise, Paris. M.D., 1873. Formerly Prof. Gen. Anat. Med. Fac.

Author of “De l’État du Foie chez les femelles en lactation” (ThÈse), Paris, 1873; “TraitÉ pratique de GynÉcologie,” Paris, 1879; second edition, 1884.

“On female guinea-pigs, which have only a single pair of mammÆ, we have made the ablation of these glands during lactation.”—“Manuel Pratique de GynÉcologie,” Paris, 1879, p. 778.

“I wish to communicate to the Society the results that I have obtained by the ablation of the mammÆ in animals. Dogs and rabbits with their six or eight mammÆ were unable to survive these experiments. I chose in preference guinea-pigs, which have, as is known, only two mammÆ, and in which the disposition of the ducts renders the operation easy, I might almost say harmless, even during the period of lactation; for out of six females operated on in the month of September not one died, and all of them are still to-day subject to observation.”—Report of the Meeting of the Soc. de Biologie, December 20, 1873, “Gaz. MÉd. de Paris,” 1874, p. 36.

“I have myself made a fair number of experiments relative to the innervation of the mammary glands on female guinea-pigs.… Considering the contradictory results, it would be well to describe the experiments before arriving at any conclusions.… Experiment No. 1, June 10, 1874.—Guinea-pig in lactation. The mammary nerve on one side is laid bare, and insulated by means of a thread. The animal exhibits signs of acute pain, especially when the nerve is stimulated by an electric current; but the stimulation, prolonged during 10 minutes, produces no appreciable effect on the teats nor on the amount of milk secreted. I divided the nerve, and on the following day, June 11, there was as much milk in one gland as in the other; nor did the electric stimulation re-applied to both ends of the divided nerve produce any apparent effect on the glandular function.… I have selected these five experiments from those I had noted down in my book, as I made them under varying conditions. In all of them the results were negative.… Rochrig observed that in the goat the effects were different—as M. Lafont had said—which proves once more that the conclusions arrived at must not be generalized, and that the phenomena may vary considerably according to the species of animal.”—“De l’Innervation de la Mamelle,” Report de la Soc. de Biologie, October 25, 1879, “Gaz. MÉd. de Paris,” 1879, p. 593.