[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]
September 1961


Author Affiliations

180 Wentworth St. Charleston, S.C.

Arch Dermatol. 1961;84(3):514. doi:10.1001/archderm.1961.01580150160040

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:—  In the March 1961 issue of the Archives of Dermatology on page 509 you have a brief note on "Interfinger webs" by my good friend, Dr. Harry L. Arnold, Jr. who has in the past served us well in pointing out inconsistencies, poor terminology, and outworn labels. In this instance, however, it seems to me that the good doctor is continuing verbosity rather than deleting it.I agree heartily with him that the word interdigital is long and somewhat clumsy. But so are the terms "interfinger webs" and "intertoe webs." What is wrong with simple toeweb and fingerweb? These terms are shorter, they are in present day common use, and we know exactly what they mean. For example, "fingerweb blastomycosis" and "toeweb dermatitis."If these shorter terms are used, even more of the Arnold typewriter ribbon may be spared.

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