The importance of diet in the treatment of chronic arthritis is a question on which there is today considerable difference of opinion. In practice, its effect, as a rule, is confused by the establishment of several forms of treatment at one time, such as the removal of infectious foci, rest in bed, electrotherapy and hydrotherapy and other hygienic measures. It is, however, the experience of many observers that improvement is often brought about by changes in diet alone. But as to the character of this change, difference of opinion also exists. Increase in diet is recommended by some and decrease by others, or reduction of proteins in one case and reduction of carbohydrates in another. Sometimes improvement has been so marked as to lead older clinicians to believe that the disease had a metabolic basis, but clinical and laboratory investigation has not offered much evidence to support this hypothesis. In fact, interest has been more directed toward the part played by bacteria in the causation of this disease, and recent work has resulted in the general belief that chronic arthritis\p=m-\withthe exception of those cases due to trauma, strain, gout, some neuropathy, scurvy and hemophilia-is the result of a bacterial process. It is, therefore, natural that the origin of such infection should be looked for, infectious foci removed, vaccines administered, and, if necessary, some form of nonspecific protein therapy utilized. These measures are often attended by marked success, but sometimes results are disappointing, and if improvement occurs, it is often of a temporary nature. In spite of this belief that the condition is a bacterial disease, there are still clinicians who insist on the importance of diet in its treatment. Pemberton,1 especially, has for many years advised careful dietetic regulation-recommending a general reduction of the food intake, and laying special stress on the restriction of carbohydrates. In our own clinic, we have been impressed with the value of this recommendation in many cases. And, further, in those cases which receive benefit from such treatment, there has been as much clinical evidence of infection as in those which are refractory to such measures.