The distinction, however, is far from being absolute. Letulle himself
admits it is a question of degree rather than of kind; the co-ordinated
tic differs from the first variety only in its greater extent,
complexity, and duration. Now, the convulsive tic may be a local,
partial, irregular, abnormal convulsion, yet these characteristics are
not sufficient to differentiate it: biting the lips is classed by
Letulle as a co-ordinated tic, but it is surely a local, partial,
irregular, abnormal muscular act; and the explosive laryngeal "ahem!" he
would similarly place, yet it cannot be said to be a phenomenon
characterised by its extent, complexity, and duration.
According to Guinon, a further distinguishing feature of the convulsive
tic is its frequent though inopportune reproduction of some reflex or
automatic purposive movement of everyday life, whereas we have just seen
that one of the elements in Letulle's co-ordinated tic is its
purposiveness. In a word, these observers apply the same epithet to two
varieties of tic which they are endeavouring to separate.
The explanation of the apparent contradiction is simple. A gesture which
seems meaningless and useless to-day becomes intelligible and logical
to-morrow, when we learn the reason for it. In the course of an attack
of conjunctivitis a patient acquires the habit of winking his eye, and
though the inflammation subsides, the habit persists. If we are ignorant
of its cause, are we to call the tic convulsive since it appears to us
needless? And if we do know its origin; can we say it is co-ordinated
when one muscle only is involved in the contraction?
The distinction drawn by Letulle between the two groups may hold good in
some cases, but certainly not in all, and in our opinion it is
preferable to abstain entirely from the attempt to base a classification
on variation in muscular contraction. Noir remarks very justly that
intermediate forms occur which are difficult to place in one or other
category. In face of the confusion to which an illogical division
inevitably leads, we may safely leave this question aside. In our view,
the motor phenomena of the disease are always systematic, co-ordinated
movements, directed for the attainment of some definite object. We
exclude all simple bulbar or spinal reflexes, and all spasms, since the
cardinal feature in these conditions is the absence of any functional
systematisation.
THE GENESIS OF TIC
We have seen how various purposive, co-ordinated movements may, by dint
of education and voluntary repetition, become automatic and be
automatically repeated should occasion arise. Imagine some such act
recurring involuntarily without any apparent reason and for no apparent
object; what does such an anomaly signify?
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account