[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
July 21, 1956


JAMA. 1956;161(12):1182. doi:10.1001/jama.1956.02970120064018

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.


To the Editor:—  I am writing about the editorial in the May 5, 1956, issue of The Journal, page 66, entitled "Keloids." Articles about keloids always puzzle me. So many things are done to the keloids, and such a few things are done to the patient who has the keloid. The approach always seems to be like the line from Macbeth, "Out, out damned spot." The attack is always made as if one local area of skin were guilty and might be removed by excision or by injection or by getting mad and literally hammering it out with an ultrasonic hammer, without realizing that it is a sign of constitutional guilt, just as the spot in Macbeth was a sign of moral guilt. Efforts to remove the two have met with about an equal amount of success. One is always moved to wonder and ask certain questions about keloids, the

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview