The author of seven books, including the Pulitzer Prize-finalist How We Die, Sherwin B. Nuland, M.D., has a reputation as a gifted and loquacious writer. A clinical professor of surgery who has served on the faculty of the Yale University School of Medicine since 1962, Dr. Nuland draws extensively in his writings on autobiographical material taken from his experiences both inside and outside of the operating room.

In 2000, Dr. Nuland completed a project on a subject that has interested him since his first days in medical school, when he began hearing stories about the historical roots of his chosen profession.

The Mysteries Within: A Surgeon Explores Myth, Medicine, and the Human Body is a culmination of a lifetime of collected stories about how man's natural curiosity about the workings of the human body eventually led to what Dr. Nuland refers to as the dawn of the scientific age in the 17th century. The Mysteries Within is an exhaustive review of the historical circumstances, personalities, and societal mores that both enlightened and constrained knowledge of human anatomy since man first became conscious of the existence of organs beneath his skin. By focusing on five organs - the liver, spleen, stomach, heart, and uterus - Dr. Nuland examines the history of medicine and the myths, superstitions, and religious thoughts that have characterized its study throughout most of the history of Western civilization.

Q: What determined the subject matter of your latest book?

A: After a lifetime of hearing some of these stories, it seemed appropriate to record them in one place. I thought readers would find them just as fascinating as I did. People think of medicine as being an ultra-scientific field of endeavor, but in fact even when it did become somewhat scientific in the 17th century, we had for more than 2,000 years been drenched in mythologies, the influences of which are still felt.

Q: Why did you choose to structure your book around the evolution of medical knowledge about five organs, and how did you choose those specific organs?

A: I chose the organs that much of medical mythology has been constructed around. As a general surgeon, I deal with the spleen, liver, and stomach consistently. My training and experience with cardiac surgery along with my fascination about the organ explain why I chose the heart. As for the uterus, it is - and continues to be - an absolute well of mythology.

Q: Why do you turn to linguistics to explain the lasting effects of myth on our understanding of the human body?

A: Long-disproved ideas about the workings of the human body continue to exist within our everyday speech and the way we think about ourselves. Our habit of saying "God bless you" is the most obvious example. Others have to do with the humors, which explain the origins of words like "phlegmatic," "sanguine," and "melancholic." The Greeks believed that cancer was caused by too much black bile, an interpretation they made based on the observation that people with cancer were always sad or depressed. Many people still think that having a melancholic disposition predisposes you to cancer. Some of these very old ideas continue to live in the language we use every day and thus influence our perception of the world around us.

Q: You trace the lives and discoveries of innumerable historical persons in your book. Which personality most impressed you?

A: That's hard to say; there are so many people who thought they were doing something scientific when they were in fact doing just the opposite. Even William Harvey, who is regarded as representing the epitome of scientific observation and interpretation, believed that blood (the circulation of which he identified) was influenced by a spirit that existed within it. We think of William Harvey as the first person to do real measurements. We should remember that even he, with his clear, objective way of looking at things, was influenced by the myth that there's some divine vital factor in blood that helps it move around the body.

Q: You repeatedly state that the historical figures you write about are necessarily trapped by the limitations on thinking imposed by the eras in which they lived. Do you believe that truly objective, detached scientific inquiry is possible?

A: No. I think any real scientist has to admit that absolute perfection of objectivity is impossible. The human mind isn't made to think logically or rationally; it seeks all sorts of fanciful explanations. And when it suits scientists to think so, they can, without being aware of it, interpret their observations in ways that are not truly objective. The simple example is that every scientist approaches his or her findings with a certain degree of predefined subjectivity, and he or she looks within those findings for evidence to support conclusions drawn before he or she began working. There's no way to avoid that.

Q: What other writing projects do you have in the works?

A: I just published a book on the life of Leonardo da Vinci as an anatomist. Now I'm doing something that's driven both by a need inside myself and by the many letters I've received. All of my writings have large autobiographical components to them; I use my life experience, whether it's in the operating room or within my own family, to illustrate notions that have come to me. I've decided to put all of this into a memoir that is scheduled for publication in 2003.