What are the limits of dermatopathology?
A “limit†is defined as “the utmost extent: a point beyond which it is impossible to go.†Where is that point in dermatopathology?
My answer might surprise the reader, so I will state it outright. The limit of dermatopathology is the diagnosis.
The entire point of the discipline, the “why†we exist as dermatopathologists is because of the diagnosis.
Let's not kid ourselves. Looking at changes in cutaneous tissue under the microscope is often a beautiful and stimulating experience, but our entire purpose is the diagnosis; without it, we literally would not know what to study, we would know neither what nor why we should communicate to clinicians about these tissue changes.
A limit provides such a purpose. A limit is nothing more than an end, while our observations and deliberations, our books, conferences, and research articles are the means.
The “end†in this case is the diagnosis. It sets the limit of our focus. Sure, there may be ancillary information that is added after the diagnosis, but it is a sequela that cannot be separated from the diagnosis as such.
When or if someone attempts to undermine the importance of a diagnosis, it is time to challenge them and ask: what are the limits of dermatopathology?
Reference:
Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged, s.v. “limit,†accessed April 27, 2013, [url="http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com/"]http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com[/url].
My answer might surprise the reader, so I will state it outright. The limit of dermatopathology is the diagnosis.
The entire point of the discipline, the “why†we exist as dermatopathologists is because of the diagnosis.
Let's not kid ourselves. Looking at changes in cutaneous tissue under the microscope is often a beautiful and stimulating experience, but our entire purpose is the diagnosis; without it, we literally would not know what to study, we would know neither what nor why we should communicate to clinicians about these tissue changes.
A limit provides such a purpose. A limit is nothing more than an end, while our observations and deliberations, our books, conferences, and research articles are the means.
The “end†in this case is the diagnosis. It sets the limit of our focus. Sure, there may be ancillary information that is added after the diagnosis, but it is a sequela that cannot be separated from the diagnosis as such.
When or if someone attempts to undermine the importance of a diagnosis, it is time to challenge them and ask: what are the limits of dermatopathology?
Reference:
Webster's Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged, s.v. “limit,†accessed April 27, 2013, [url="http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com/"]http://unabridged.merriam-webster.com[/url].
1 Comment
Recommended Comments