Journal of the
120 Correspondence
does not have more knowledge of corns and calluses
than do podiatrists, although it is a toss-up on warts.
Podiatrists in general have a lot of knowledge that is
useful to the average practicing dermatologist. Podia-
trists have taught me things that were and still are to-
tally unknown to mainstream dermatology. No only the
phenol technic but also the entire field of pedal
biomechanisms has been developed to a great degree by
podiatrists. I believe strongly that all departments of
dermatology should have some liaison with podiatry (as
some do now) and that without such liaison graduating
residents and the patients soon to be under their care
witl be cheated of the best the practitioner has to offer.
Richard C. Gibbs, M.D.
24 East 36117 St.
New York, NY 10016
Reply
To the Editor:
I will deal with each of M. Port's (D.P.M.) points in
sequence.
Plantar warts are not " a trap shoot" at best. Derma-
tologists' in-depth knowledge of the wart virus and its
relationship to the human host enables them to handle
warts as skillfully as present knowledge permits. The
dermatologist recognizes the problem of the lack of
resistance against the wart virus and is able to handle
the plantar wart conservatively with little discomfort
and maximization of function until the body rejects the
plantar wart virus and wart. The wide depth of the
dermatologists' medical experience permits the derma-
tologists to utilize other modalities such as bleomycin,
interferon, dinitrochlorobenzene (DNCB), etc. when
indicated.
I disagree strongly with M. Port (D.P.M.) that
"most corns and calluses are not primary cutaneous
problems but are usually secondary to the bone and
joint manifestations." Most plantar corns and calluses
are due to footwear and may be corrected by simple
paring, keratolytics, a simple padding, and wider
shoes. This basic knowledge is held by every dermatol-
ogist. There is only a small minority of" patients with
structural defects, and these are best handled in consul-
tation with an orthopedic surgeon and/or an interested,
knowledgeable podiatrist. The dermatologist's wide
medical experience enables him to deal with the asso-
ciated vascular or neurologic problems which may ac-
company these complicated cases.
As I mentioned in my original letter, we established
an evening wart office about 2 years ago and the de-
American Academy of
Dermatology
mand for it has increased to the point where it is now
open four nights a week. This is in spite of the fact that
we see only patients who are referred to us from other
physicians and provide a number of educational mate-
rials about self-treatment of warts. I would suspect that
any dermatologist who opened a special treatment
office for the management of foot lesions would be very
busy in a short time. I hope many will, as the dermatol-
ogists' experience and skills make them uniquely qual-
ified to handle these problems.
Robert N, Richards, M.D.
4800 Leslie St,, Suite 305
Willow~ktle, Tolvnto, Canada
M2J 2K9
Erythema multiforme "major" and "minor"
v e r s u s " m a j u s " and " m i n u s "
To the Editor:
The ungrammatical coinages "erythema multiforme
major" and "erythema multifomae minor" are used to
denote subtypes of erythema multiforme (Huff JC,
Weston WL, Tonneson MG: Erythema multiforme: A
critical review of characteristics, diagnostic criteria,
and causes. J AM ACAD DERMATOL 8:763-775, 1983).
These terms are bad Latin.
A Latin adjective must match the gender of the noun
it modifies. The adjectives major and minor must be
given their neuter gender endings in order to agree with
eo~thema, a Latinized Greek neuter noun. The correct
forms would be "erythema multiforme m a j u s " and
"erythema multiforme minus."
Arthur W. Gulick, M.D.
227 North Sheldon Rd.
Plymouth, MI 48170
Reply
To the Editor:
Dr. Gulick has con'ectly pointed out that "erythema
multiforme major" and "erythema multiforme m i n o r "
are "bad Latin." These terms were first used by B, A.
Thomas in the British literature in 1950 j and should be
considered English rather than Latin in derivation. This
is certainly not the first, nor the last, example of terms
in the English medical literature that do not follow the
rules of Latin grammar.
Understanding of erythema multiforme has always
been hampered by matters of definition and terminol-
ogy, and the concept that the diseases that are called
"erythema multiforme" are heterogeneous and include