=Etiology.=--In considering infantile scurvy we are concerned almost entirely with the artificially-fed baby. It is true that in the literature we meet with scattered reports of _scurvy in breast-fed babies_ and that these cases seem to constitute a noteworthy group; in point of fact, they are comparatively few. The collective investigation of the American Pediatric Society includes ten infants who had been given breast milk exclusively, and Concetti adds another ten in his compilation of 682 cases.[7] In spite of their paucity these cases require separate consideration because they represent an important aspect from an etiologic standpoint. How are we to explain the fact that human milk may lead to rather than protect against this disorder? On investigating more closely it is found that these cases differ in several important respects from the group which has been artificially fed. They are of a different age; instead of being in the second half year of life they are generally but a few months old. Furthermore, the signs are not the same. The hemorrhages involve the upper extremities fully as frequently as the lower extremities, and often appear at unusual sites--for example, on the scalp or as large subcutaneous effusions at various parts of the body. In many instances it has been noted that the nursing mothers were suffering from some debilitating disease such as tuberculosis or syphilis, or had an insufficient supply of milk, or that there had been some other unusual factor, as Freund has shown in an article devoted to this particular aspect. It is not necessary, however, to fall back on these attendant circumstances to exclude from consideration many of the cases. For example, Crandall's case of "scurvy in an infant of six weeks" should be invalidated, not because, as Freund suggests, the mother had rheumatism and insufficient milk, but because of the age of the infant, and the course of the disease; first one arm was involved, then the other, then hemorrhages appeared on the skin, and finally it was cured by giving a teaspoonful of fresh cream before each nursing. Had the baby really suffered from scurvy it could not have been cured by this means. Southgate's case must also be rejected, not because the mother was tuberculous but in view of the symptoms--the arms and legs were pseudoparetic, "the legs, feet and hands were double their normal size," and moderately large hemorrhages were present on the back and chest. It seems hardly necessary to discuss in detail the score of cases which comprise this group, as, in general, the same criticism applies to all. Some evidently were congenital syphilis, still more must be regarded as sepsis, and others as unknown toxic conditions. Apart from these cases the question must be considered whether scurvy can occur in a breast-fed infant. Personally, we have never met with a case of this kind, and, as Finkelstein aptly remarks, there has been "no necropsy of a breast-fed case or conclusive X-ray