Year: 2009
Type: editorial
Abstract: Marathon of eponymsThis issue of Oral Diseases, contains a study on an eponymous condition named Hutchinson-Gilford progeria syndrome (HGPS), as it was first described in 1886 by Jonathan Hutchinson but also described independently in the following year by Hastings Gilford.An eponym (from Greek epı´[epi, Ôupon'] + } omtla [onuma, name]), is a person, whether real or fictitious, after whom an item is named or thought to be named.The use of eponyms in medicine and dentistry is widespread; for example, Ruffner (1977) lists 20 000 eponyms.Nevertheless, the use of eponyms is highly contentious.Some argue that healthcare professionals may be baffled by terms that do not accurately outline the condition, that eponyms may not necessarily reflect the truth of discoveries, and suggest eponyms be abandoned in favor of more descriptive terms.Eponyms certainly can have some rather annoying features.For example, many diseases have more than one eponym.Some eponymous authors even have multiple conditions ascribed to them so it may be taxing to distinguish which condition is being discussed (Gorlin was a prime example).Swee (2007) points out that another problem is that some eponyms do not refer to the same person: for example, the Pick cell (foam cell), Pick disease (a neuro-degenerative disorder) and Pick pericarditis were named after, respectively -Ludwig Pick (German pathologist), Arnold Pick (Czech psychiatrist), and Friedel Pick (Czech-Austrian physician).Eponyms can differ between cultures (e.g.Behcet syndrome is often termed Adamantiades syndrome in Greece: Sjogren syndrome is termed Gougerot syndrome in France).As long ago as 1978, the American Dental Association (ADA) stated in their Principles of Ethics Section 15 that ÔThe use of eponyms in connection with drugs, agents, instruments or appliances is generally to be discouraged.'As to eponymous conditions, Woywodt and Matteson (2007) argue ÔEponyms often provide a less than truthful account of how diseases were discovered and reflect influence, politics, language, habit, or even sheer luck rather than scientific achievement,' and they state.ÔMoreover, the continued use of tainted eponyms is inappropriate and will not be accepted by patients, relatives, or the public.'In contrast, Whitworth (2007) believes that eponyms remain Ôa useful reflection of medical history.'
Source: Oral Diseases
Authors: Crispian Scully, Bruce Baum
Language: English
Subfield: Anatomy
Field: Medicine
Domain: Health Sciences
Open Access status: bronze
OpenAlex ID: W2143419656