This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Topic Collections  • Dermatology, Other  • Alert me on articles by topic

Arch Dermatol. 2000;136:62-64.

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

INTRODUCTION

Can there be a soul so jaded for whom entering a new millennium will not evoke memories of halcyon moments gone and lofty aspirations for a long and favored future? But, as George Santayana warned, one who ignores the past will repeat its mistakes.

In the 4 decades since I discovered dermatology, there has been immeasurable change in the perception of the specialty, initiated perhaps by the realization that the skin is a showcase for observing metabolism at the cellular and molecular level. The choreographic response of the pigment cells of the frog to light or to hormones was a graphic display of the quality and promise of dermatological research—and that was just the beginning! There was also the realization that dermatology was a discipline that was largely ignored and therefore poorly learned by internists and generalists; this stemmed perhaps from the lack of full-time dermatologists at Yale and Harvard, . . . [Full Text of this Article]

ADDENDUM