12 
following may be mentioned in particular: Anchylostomiasis, ankylos- 
tomiasis, brickmakers’ anemia, Egyptian chlorosis, miners’ anemia, 
miners’ cachexia, tunnel anemia, St. Gothard tunnel disease, tropical 
chlorosis, hookworm disease, and tunnel disease. (See also pp. 31, 32, 
96.) 
HISTORICAL REYIEW. 
In order to understand the exact status of the subject of uncinari- 
asis, it will be well to take a brief historical review of hookworms in 
general, hookworm disease in general, and hookworm disease in the 
United States. 
BRIEF REVIEW OF HOOKWORMS. 
It is quite probable that the ancient Egyptians, nearly thirty -live 
hundred j^ears ago, were acquainted with the parasites which we now 
call hookworms. From a zoological standpoint, however, the first 
hookworm knoAvn to science was a parasite in the intestine of the 
common badger {21eles taxus) of Europe, described by Goeze, a Ger- 
man clergyman, in 1782. Goeze called the parasite “der Haarrund- 
wurm” (the hair round worm), and gaA^e to it the Latin name Ascaris 
criniformis. Although he placed this species in the same genus with 
the ordinaiT eel worm, Ascaris lumhricoides^ he intimated that it rep- 
resented a distinct genus. One of the anatomical characters which 
Goeze noticed was a membranous expansion on the tail of the male, 
and in this he saw two finger- or ray-like structures Avhich he inter- 
preted as ‘‘hooks” (see caudal rays in figs. 1, 15). 
In 1789 Froelich found a similar worm in the common fox {Canis 
valjyes or Vulpes vulpes) of Europe. He noticed the 'same mem- 
branous expansion and “two hooks with man}^ points” on the end of 
the tail. On account of this character he adopted the A^ernacular 
name “Haakenwurm” (hookworm), and proposed the generic name 
JJncinaria for the new genus Avhich he established. 
It IS now known that the membranous expansion is the caudal 
bursa, found in all members of the family Strongylidse, while the 
so-called “hooks” represent the “rays” or “ribs” Avhich support the 
bursa (see fig. 1). In the early part of the nineteenth century several 
other species of hookworms were described as parasitic in various 
animals, and they were united generically Avith the “colic worms” 
(strongyles) of horses. 
animal ’vvith any member of this subfamily. In case the term “anchylostomiasis” 
IS adopted, which of the many spellings should be recognized? Adopting uncin- 
ariasis relieves us of the necessity of discussing that point, and further giv.es to the 
name of the disease the same orthography in several different languages. The case 
at hand gives rise to the question whether it is not inadAusable to name diseases 
after the zoological names of the parasites, at least during the transitional stage of 
zoological nomenclature. As a matter of fact it is the function of the medical pro- 
fession, not that of the zoological, to determine what names should be used to desig- 
nate diseases, but at the present moment medical terminology is subjective. 
I 
