{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.036468330134357005, 'fraction_numerical': 0.023032629558541268, 'mean_word_length': 4.926136363636363, '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}}
Double mutations causing haemophilia B: a double whammy!

I read with interest the recent Historical Review by Bagot and Arya (2008), which revisits the origins of Virchow’s Triad. I applaud the authors’ effort to impart a broader understanding of the use of this term and, to a similar end, I wish to offer the following: While others may have preceded him, I believe that Dr Charles A. Owen deserves important recognition for pointing-out that Virchow did not, himself, propose a triad for venous thrombosis. Owen (2001) reported this in his text: A History of Blood Coagulation; this preceded my own presentation (Dickson, 2003) and reports by others with an interest in this subject (Brotman et al, 2004; Malone, 2005). Finally, I believe that it is perhaps most accurate to suggest that the triad was misattributed to Virchow, rather than misinterpreted by our predecessors. Ultimately, a more comprehensive review of the German medical literature may one day hold important clues to the origins of this enigmatic eponym (Dickson, 2004).