[Skip to Navigation]
February 1921


Author Affiliations

Associate Professor of Dermatology, Post-Graduate Medical School; Instructor in Dermatology, University and Bellevue Medical College; Attending Physician, New York Skin and Cancer Hospital NEW YORK

From the Dermatological Service, University and Bellevue Medical College.

Arch Derm Syphilol. 1921;3(2):126-132. doi:10.1001/archderm.1921.02350140018004

The disinclination to admit the possibility of a second infection with syphilis in a patient in whom the acquired disease has become generalized is fortified by clinical experience of many years. A few doubtful cases might be cited, but the preponderant weight of the opinion of the medical profession has been against such an interpretation of the facts presented. We are still ignorant of the explanation of the resistance of the tissues of a syphilitic patient to infection from without, while susceptible to local infection from within, especially as some of the late genital lesions often closely simulate a chancre.

If there have been so few, if any, authentic cases of reinfection, the explanation appears to be simple—there were few cases of radical cure. Some of the greatest authorities, notably Fournier and Hutchinson, believed, apparently, that they could eradicate the disease, and they certainly were able to follow some of

Add or change institution