The gloves probably make the hands more susceptible to dermatophytid formation through their macerating effects and, after their formation, tend to convert the noninflammatory dermatophytids into acute inflamma¬ tory lesions by the same mechanical processes.For the dermatitis thus produced, we suggest the name "leather-phytids," thus expressing in two words what it requires many sentences to explain. We further suggest the term "chemical phytids" for dermatitis due to a combined sensitivity to a chemical and to superficial mycotic infection. When the chemical is known, for instance potassium bichromate, the term "potassium bichromate phytids" is appropriate. CONCLUSION 1. We have carried out studies of an eczematoid type of industrial dermatitis of the hands appearing in workmen wearing leather gloves many hours daily. The dermatitis has been shown to be caused by two factors: (1) the traumatizing effect of the gloves, and (2) allergic sensitization of the hands due to the pres¬ ence of dermatophytosis elsewhere (usually on the feet).2. Since dermatophytosis of the feet is almost uni¬ versal among industrial workers, many of whom must wear leather gloves for protection, we believe that "glove phytids" will be recognized with great frequency.3. We have used a method of treatment which we believe is rational and which has given good results in this series of cases.the literature fails to reveal an account of such a condition in this occupational group, and since in the light of our investigations the hazard of lead poisoning is a new one in these workers, a report is considered justified. The most important information concerning these patients is summarized in the accompanying table. All the patients are males and with but two exceptions are in early adult life. These men have been working as roofers from periods of three months to ten years. All of them give a history of holding the galvanized roofing nails in their mouths while working. None of these give a history of any other exposure to lead. The most striking facts about the entire group are found in the dates of their first attacks of colic. As long as most of these men had been working at this occupation, with but one exception none of them had had lead colic previous to May 1939. The diagnoses on admission or prior to entry are in no way surprising. Patient 1 had a diagnosis of possible lead poisoning made prior to admission on the basis of basophilic stippling in the red blood cells. Patients 5 and 6 made their own diagnoses on the basis of the previous experiences of their fellow workers. It should be noted that one of the patients had an appendectomy at the time of his first attacks of colic.Each patient complained of colic and all but three of constipation of a moderately severe degree. Only one presented evidence of neuritis and in this instance it was limited to paresthesias involving the arm. None of the patients presented indications of notable neuro¬ logic changes. The lead line was present in but three.In view of the conflicting reports in the l...