{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.029827315541601257, 'fraction_numerical': 0.012558869701726845, 'mean_word_length': 5.254901960784314, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Can a diagnosis be made in retrospect? The case of Desiderius Erasmus.

Review of data in very old charts sometimes brings new insights and perspectives, and suggests new hypothesis for illnesses of patients long deceased. Such applications can be made if enough information is available, e.g., autobiographical letters, skeletal remains, pictorial representations. Finally the process must be discussed in the context of the major disease processes occurring at that time. When such an approach was applied to Erasmus (Rotterdam c 1466--Basle 1536), the differential diagnosis included gout, syphilitic arthritis and enteric rheumatism.