Tautological Nature of Guyton’s Theory of Blood Pressure Control

To the Editor: In a recent short paper, I pointed out the tautological nature of Arthur Guyton's so-called "Laws of Blood Pressure Control".¹ Kurtz et al. have presented a review of the consequences that the tautological nature of these laws have had on research on blood pressure control and hypertension.² While Lohmeier and Pruett³ demonstrate a breath of knowledge of the field, it is discouraging to find that in accusing Kurtz et al. of illogic for not "providing evidence discrediting these laws" they have missed the central thesis. As Kurtz et al. and other commentators⁴ recognize, a tautology is a self-evident statement that is true by definition and "cannot" be disproven. So indeed, Lohmeier and Pruett are entirely correct in pointing out that Kurtz et al. fail to disprove Guyton's laws. However, in doing so, Lohmeier and Pruett are attacking a straw man since it is central thesis of Kurtz et al. that Guyton's laws of blood pressure control are technically (and absolutely) correct. One can only hope that other readers of Kurtz et al. do not avoid the opportunity to critically evaluate the current state of understanding of blood pressure control and hypertension.

http://ift.tt/2qIWAUy