[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
February 1920

DERMATOLOGIC MISNOMERS

Author Affiliations

Instructor of Dermatology, College of Physicians and Surgeons, University of Southern California; Dermatologist to Graves' Dispensary, Los Angeles Medical Department., University of California, and to Kaspare Cohn Hospital LOS ANGELES

Arch Derm Syphilol. 1920;1(2):182-190. doi:10.1001/archderm.1920.02350020065007

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

Abstract

That the words should carry the exact and definite meaning assigned to them, would seem to be a natural requisite and necessity for an intelligent and productive exchange of ideas. That a clear and definite terminology is a sine qua non in any branch of science, seems also to be a truism. Medicine, as a branch of natural sciences, dealing with a concrete and tangible subject matter, should be capable of an exact and definite terminology and should be particularly insistent on the correct use of it.

Of all branches of clinical medicine, dermatology, which enjoys a unique distinction of visualizing its subject matter and of being able to verify its clinical observations by the histopathologic study, would seem to be the one best capable to select terminology of a steady and definite content and to attain the complete unity between a dermatologic term and the clinical concept expressed by

×