[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
February 10, 1906


JAMA. 1906;XLVI(6):435. doi:10.1001/jama.1906.02510330041006

As medicine grows older there is a tendency to discard some of the terms formerly used as being either inaccurate or unscientific. In some instances, a term, such as scrofula, has been rightly discarded, because it covered a variety of conditions, due to a variety of causes, and clinically separable. In other cases, terms have dropped into disuse because they were unfashionable or because it seemed that the condition they described was not scientifically proved to exist. Among this last group must be mentioned the so-called diatheses and temperaments about which our professional grandparents were so fond of speaking and which we so rarely mention. We probably tend nowadays in some ways to be too scientific, to discard terms too easily because we can not show actual pathologic evidence that they exist, forgetting that there are many conditions undoubtedly existent, of the pathology of which we are still ignorant. Among