Abstract
To the Editor: The article on Industrially Acquired Porphyria in the JuneArchives of Dermatologyby Dr. Bleiberg and associates was very interesting. However, I am puzzled by two matters. There were frequent statements to the effect that the Watson-Schwartz method was used for detecting urinary and fecal uroporphyrin and coproporphyrin excretion. This is exceedingly puzzling as the Watson-Schwartz test is a test for porphobilinogen and not uroporphyrin or coproporphyrin. I would be most interested to learn just what test was used for screening for uroporphyrin and coproporphyrin. This point is not idle carping, as porphobilinogen excretion is usually completely normal in those cases of porphyria with cutaneous symptoms. Most cases of cutaneous porphyria would be missed if the Watson-Schwartz test were relied upon as a screening procedure. Secondly, I am puzzled why a study from a metropolitan area did not employ quantitative methods of measuring porphyrin excretion. The experts
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
