{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022727272727272728, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.617283950617284, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Cultural Production in the Early American Republic

pathologist Xavier Bichat constituting a major turning point. Although later challenged by François Magendie, François Broussais, and Claude Bernard for his vitalism, Bichat’s physiological studies reveal a decisive experimental and reductionist approach (something anathema to earlier vitalists); moreover, based upon her careful analysis of manuscript sources, Rey underscores the conceptual uniqueness of Bichat’s histological and pathological work, challenging Othmar Keel’s contention that the clinical approach first developed outside French medical circles.