Dr. Schmitt makes some interesting points in his comments about our article. First of all, he finds it remarkable that our clinic has had experiences with 149 children with constitutional short stature (CSS) and none with familial short stature (FSS). If that were true, it would indeed be remarkable. There seems to be a semantic problem arising over our definitions of CSS and FSS. We defined our children as having CSS if they had heights greater than 2 SD below the mean, any retardation in skeletal maturation, no family history of abnormal short stature, and no pathologic etiology for the short stature.

This content is only available via PDF.
You do not currently have access to this content.