This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

ITS RELATION TO THE TIME OF TREATMENT OF THE FIRST INFECTION

CHARLES R. L. HALLEY, M.D.; HARRY WASSERMAN, M.D.

Arch Intern Med. 1928;41(6):843-866.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

It has long been recognized that second infections in syphilis in man are not common; indeed, prior to the discovery of spirochetes and the introduction of arsphenamine, a comparatively small number of supposed instances had been reported, and there was considerable discussion as to their actual occurrence. Ricord and Fournier stated that they had never observed a satisfactory example, whereas in 1895 Hutchinson reported fifty-four "reinfections," only a few of which his son later was willing to accept.

When the diagnosis of syphilis rested on clinical grounds alone, the recognition of the occurrence of second infection with this disease was admittedly difficult and frequently open to question. Many of the instances reported prior to 1910 may have been and doubtless were true examples of second infection, but since the diagnosis rests entirely on clinical grounds, the evidence is hardly acceptable according to present standards. With the discovery of the causative . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
WASHINGTON, D. C.; BALTIMORE

From the Department of Medicine of the Johns Hopkins Medical School, Baltimore.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?