Caduceus as a symbol of medicine emblem of the physician [...] it is most unfortunate that the 'confusion' exists." In an anonymous rebuttal contained in a letter to the editor published three months later in "The Military Surgeon" it was claimed that the late Col. John R. van Hoff was a member of the board that selected the emblem ("if he was not the one who was chiefly instrumental in its adoption"). In the letter to the editor reproduced by Emerson, the anonymous author claims According to this view the caduceus was not intended to be a medical symbol (and, though explained differently, this reflects the
Caduceus as a symbol of medicine intended to be a symbol of medicine. The inconsistency was noticed several years later by the librarian to the Surgeon General, but for reasons which are not entirely clear, the symbol was not changed. Considerable light is shed on this confusion by an anonymous letter republished by Emerson, a historian of United States Army insignia and uniforms. He indicates that the April 1924 issue of "The Military Surgeon" printed a review of an earlier article that appeared in the "Presse Medicale" in which the author stated "There is nothing in history to justify the use of the caduceus as the