‘Psychoanalysing’ the different forms of ‘scale disease’ dealt with in Leviticus 13–14 can shed some light on the way the skin can be interpreted in this context. The eight psychic functions of the skin identified by Anzieu reveal how individuals meet collective anxieties on the surface of the skin where unconscious conflicts about identity boundaries are projected and inscribed.
Amongst the approximately 250 body parts mentioned in the Hebrew Bible, the skin has not received the same attention in the reception of this text as others such as the heart, head or hand. The skin is only briefly mentioned and then only for its diseases in the anthropological Old Testament work of Hans Wolff (
Yet amongst the diseases mentioned in the Hebrew Bible those of the skin occur the most. Skin diseases were likewise viewed differently from other health problems in Mesopotamia where many people with disabilities were incorporated in society, but those with skin diseases were ostracised, even in the netherworld (Walls
The word, עוֹר [skin], appears 99 times in the Hebrew Bible. That is apart from the
Of these 100 instances, 53 – that is, the majority – occur in Leviticus. These figures therefore suggest a high awareness and sensitivity to the skin in this biblical book. On the other hand, the Psalms which are well known for their high frequency of body references do not mention the skin explicitly even once.
In Leviticus 13 alone 46 instances can be found (but none in chapter 14, although it also deals with צָרַעַת [scale disease]), that is, almost half of all mentions in the Hebrew Bible occur in only one chapter.
Of these 46 instances, 34, that is, about 75%, refer to some kind of human skin disorder. This is also almost two-thirds of the total of 56 explicit references to the
All of these references to the human skin in Leviticus 13 are therefore about a
In the rest of the Pentateuch, except for 3 references to a human being (all about Moses’ shining face after his encounter with God [Ex 34:29, 30, 35]), the 2 instances in Genesis, the 17 instances in Exodus and the 8 occurrences in Numbers all refer to the skin of dead animals. In fact, the very first time we find the word, עוֹר [skin], in the Hebrew Bible is in Genesis 3:21 where the hide of an animal is used to cover shame after the ‘fall’ (almost like a vicarious sacrifice) in the garden of Eden – and by doing so implying death if not killing an animal or even animals. The hides of (dead) animals are always depicted as objects used either for clothing, a tent or as sacrifice.
In Job one finds 11 references, that is more than 10% of the total in the Hebrew Bible; 10 of these are about Job. Only Job 10:11 and 40:31 celebrate the miracle of the skin; in the former his own and in the latter that of the leviathan. The 3 instances in Lamentations are again about human suffering: being worn out, withered, hot. In Micah both references occur in a context of criminality. The context of Jeremiah 13:23 is again that of punishment, leaving only Ezekiel 37:6 and 8 where a resurrection is hoped for and 2 Kings 1:18 and the 5 instances mentioned above as positively connoted instances. This means that the skin is problematised in more than 90% of cases and legalised in most of them. In humans the skin is often juxtaposed to bones and flesh, suggesting its essential part in bare human existence.
This highly problematised depiction of an essential body part is perhaps why the skin is not one of the 27 body parts attributed to God and as such implies perhaps that God has no limitations and that the identity of God remains elusive. In the majority of cases the skin seems to suggest liminality as essence of human and animal existence.
In this study the psychoanalytical meanings of the skin in Leviticus 13–14 will be outlined in terms of the work by the French psychoanalyst and one of the main exponents on the psychological meaning of the skin, Didier Anzieu. While working in a dermatological ward he discovered that skin problems always have psychological correlates, if not causes. In addition, current psychological research findings show that skin disorders lead to more stigmatisation, discrimination and humiliation than other visible disorders and are often incorrectly associated with sexual misconduct (Koo & Yeung
These psychoanalytic interpretations will finally be situated in the possible context where legislation about scale diseases made sense.
The laws in Leviticus about sex, food, circumcision, skin disease(s), childbirth, corpses and genital discharges are all about the body and its boundaries. In chapters 13–14 numerous body parts are explicitly mentioned apart from the skin and the implied eyes: flesh (19 times), hair (18 times), head (13 times), forehead (4 times), beard (3 times), moustache or upper lip (once), feet (once), and the right great toe, right ear and right thumb (each 4 times) as extremities used metonymically to outline the whole body, resonating with the scale disease מֵראֹשׁוֹ וְעַד-רַגְלָיו [from his head even to his feet] in Leviticus 13:12 and echoed in the reverse direction by Deuteronomy 28:35 and Job 2:7. The skin is therefore dealt with in a context where the whole body features in the consciousness of the author or authors.
From the overview of the occurrences of the word, עוֹר, in the Hebrew Bible the majority are in the context of צָרַעַת, which has not only been proven by dermatologists in the 1950s to be a false attribution of the contagious Hansen’s disease, but even impossible to identify with any modern pathological category. In this study it will be translated by ‘scale disease’, following Milgrom who actually regards it as a
Otherwise many possibilities for the meaning of צָרַעַת have been mooted: psoriasis, seborrhoeic dermatitis, certain mycotic infections, patchy eczema and pityriasis rosea (Hulse
In Leviticus 13 seven categories of skin appearances are dealt with: בּהַרֶֶת, a shiny mark, which could turn out to be a מִספְּחַתַ, scab, in Leviticus 13:4–8; שְׂאֵת-לבְָנהָ, white discoloration (not swelling [Milgrom
The five symptoms, some of which are common to several of these seven appearances, are whether the mark is עָמקֹ מִן-הָעוֹר or שָׁפלָ, that is, deeper or lower than the skin, in Leviticus 13:3, 4, 25, 30, 31, 32 and in Leviticus 13:20, 21, 26 respectively; whether it פשָָׂה [spreads] in Leviticus 13:7, 8, 22, 27, 35, 36, 51; whether הָפְכהָ שֵׂעָר לבָָן [it has turned the hair white] in Leviticus 13:3, 10, 25 or צהָבֹ [yellow] in Leviticus 13:30, whether כּהֵָה [it fades] after the quarantine period in Leviticus 13:6, 21, 26, 28, 56 and whether בּשָָׂר חַי [‘raw’ flesh] appears in the mark in Leviticus 13:10, 14, 15, 16.
Whatever disorders were meant, they would have – according to Anzieu’s theories – had an effect on the ego’s organisation. The inverse also applies: the skin can also ‘say’ what is otherwise unspeakable because the symptoms of the body are an unconscious reminder of trauma.
These skin appearances are dealt with in Leviticus 13–14 between the associated conditions of the two transitional processes of childbirth in chapter 12 and זָב (one who has an issue, i.e. a genital discharge) in chapter 15, both to be privately controlled whereas scale diseases were a public and visible matter, dealt with only by professionals, the priests (Milgrom
In the non-priestly texts of Exodus 4:6; Numbers 12:10 and 2 Kings 5:27 no colour such as לבְָנהָ [white] in Leviticus 13:3, 4(bis), 10(bis), 13, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 24, 25, 26, 38, 39, 43 or לבְנָהָ אֲדַמְדָּמֶת [bright-reddish white] in Leviticus 13:19, 24, 42 is mentioned but only that צָרַעַת [scale disease] is like snow, that is, exfoliative or desquamative (Hulse
Colour plays an important role in all the different forms of the disease in Leviticus 13, however: (Leviticus 13:2, 3, 4, 6, 10, 13, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26, 28, 30, 31, 37, 38, 39, 42, 43, 49, 55, 56; Leviticus 14:37) and when it resembles death especially by being white and through the peeling of the skin, it needs to be excluded like a corpse (cf. also Milgrom
The whiteness of either the skin in Leviticus 13:4, 10, 13, 17, 19, 38, 39, 42, 43, of the hair in Leviticus 13:3, 10, 20, 21, 25, 26 and of the flesh in Leviticus 13:16, 24 has different meanings: only in the case of hair is it problematic and might have suggested death. In the case of flesh it is explicitly positive, while in the case of skin it is ambiguous. For that reason the priest would have had to remember exactly the colour and the number of affected hairs after the quarantine period to compare and evaluate its status.
That derivatives of מַרְאֶה [appearance] occur numerous times (in Leviticus 13:3, 4, 5, 12, 14, 20, 25, 30, 31, 32, 34, 37, 43, 57), a
That the skin is described from a subjective point of view is clear from the narrative about Naaman in 2 Kings 5:9–15, who does not seem to realise his צָרַעַת [scale disease] until his Israelite slave girl, an outsider to him, recognises and interprets it as a sign of impurity, that is, identifies it from her own religious perspective. Even as an outsider he is by implication accepted as agent of God and so into and by the Israelite religion and healed from the ‘outsider-disease’, now transferred to those who act against God’s will and so become outsiders themselves in 2 Kings 5:27. Naaman’s healing is outside his own country, outside the expected procedures in the Ancient Near East, outside the Israelite palace and even outside the house of Elisha. The question arises, however, why he was allowed into the city. It could be that, what later became postexilic laws, had not yet been implemented in the late 9th century BCE and so strengthens the possibility that the demarcations of Leviticus had to do with processing the exilic trauma of exclusion, separation, loss, fragmentation, violence and a lack of emotional space obviously relived in the postexilic environment.
The same irony can be found with Miriam in Numbers 12:10 who rejects the black outsider Cushite wife of Moses (who also in Exodus 4:6 experiences scale disease), but is then punished by the white outsider-disease.
Although Anzieu (
In
Anzieu likewise found that those who had suffered skin damage suffered correlative damage to their psychic container or ‘envelope’ as well. The state of the body as sign of the psychological or spiritual condition is also hinted at in Leviticus 13–14 (Willis
Every psychic function, organ and agency as well as every character trait derive from a concrete basis in the body. The ego is the projection of the skin in the psyche. Tactile experience therefore determines the capacity for physical and affective closeness and intimacy.
A skin is the bodily basis of the mental image of the experience of the body’s surface, the ego which Freud (
Although initially metaphorising the skin-ego as a sac, a screen, a sieve and a mirror, Anzieu eventually identifies eight psychic functions of the skin in health. This theory will now be applied to the information about the conception of the skin in Leviticus 13–14. Some aspects of the way scale diseases are dealt with could have been interpreted from the perspective of other functions as well though.
The skin’s physical support of the skeleton and muscles is like the Winnicottian holding: the interiorisation of the mother’s hands allows unity and solidity to the psyche to keep on functioning and being (Anzieu
The question can be asked what would have happened if the mould infected the walls of the Temple. The answer may surface from a halakha reporting that these laws only applied to Jewish homes outside Jerusalem (Liss
Hartley (
Just as the skin, so the law holds the psyche together, especially when the self seems to fall apart in the peeling of the skin which is the case with scale disease.
Symptoms which were not spreading were at least temporarily acceptable as in Leviticus 13:5, 6, 23, 28, 32, 34, 53, 55. Here the skin fulfilled an aspect of its maintaining function properly by preserving the
On the other hand, those who are ‘leaking’, ‘liquefying’, ‘falling through holes’ or ‘spilling out’ need the protection of the law to cover them and others exposed to the threat. This also ties in with the general thinking of Mary Douglas about fixed categories with fixed boundaries from which nothing should ‘leak’.
Closely tied to the skin’s
However, open sores, the flaky nature of some forms of skin diseases or fungi on certain materials which would have suggested a threatening loss of the surface as well as reddishness (e.g. on a bald area) which would have reminded of ‘raw’ flesh and thus a ‘hole’ in the skin all come down to the point that the destruction of the wholeness of the surface of the body or object renders it unclean as this disintegration would have reminded of non-containment and therefore of death and chaos.
In Leviticus 13:14 it would seem that the scale disease becomes like a new (unacceptable) ‘skin’ and that it is actually about the loss of (the original) skin exposing raw flesh as the ‘new’ skin. This is even the case when הַבּשָָׂר הַחַי is translated as ‘wildes Fleisch’ (granulation [not yet scar] tissue) by Gerstenberger (
Just as no one can go without clothes, so too can no one go without skin. The words in Leviticus 13:15 state it clearly: הַבָּשָׂר הַחַי טָמֵא הוּא [the raw flesh is unclean]. That is also why scale disease in the form of white discoloration or a לבְנָהָ אֲדַמְדָּמֶת [white-bright-red, a superlative] shiny mark erupting or breaking out (through the skin) in a boil is problematic in Leviticus 13:19–20.
In Leviticus 13:39, it is a בּהֹקַ [tetter] which פּרַָח [has broken out], although this is regarded as pure, perhaps because it does not flake, which is, however, not mentioned in the text. How עמָקֹ in Leviticus 13:3.4 or שָׁפלָ in Leviticus 13:20 (synonyms: deep or low) the disorder is, shows how ‘thin’ the skin is. This factor also plays a role in Leviticus 13:30–34 where a נתֶֶק [scall] penetrates the skin on the virtually fleshless part of the head and the ‘beard’, that is, the jaw (Milgrom
Although the שְׁחיִן [boil] in Leviticus 13:18, 19, 20, 23 covers the afflicted it is a false cover as it makes him ‘leak’ and so threatens emptying him out. According to Anzieu (
Baldness, that is the loss of
At the same time the שְׁחיִן [boil] has associations with heat as in the cognates of Aramaic, Ugaritic and Akkadian (and in English!), which is why Rashi regards it as a sore resulting from flesh growing hot (Milgrom
The language of Leviticus 13 repeatedly suggests aggression, even military or criminal, through such words or their derivatives as, פּרַָח [has broken out], or פשָָׂה [spread] for the eruptions of someone who does not ‘contain’ himself. That is why the priest הסְִגּיִר [shuts out and shuts up] a suspect as נֶגַע [mark], a depersonalising metonym in Leviticus 13:4, 12, 13, 17, 31 for the afflicted בּוֹ [in or on whom is] in Leviticus 13:9, 29, 44, 45, 46 the symptoms which seems to be the priest’s sole object of attention and not the afflicted. The marginalised somehow becomes anonymous. Likewise in Leviticus 13:50b אֶת-הַנֶּגַע [the mark] is likewise metonymically used for the object in which it is.
In Leviticus 13:45 tearing and therefore getting rid of his clothes as protection signifies shame, mourning or both. As a last resort to try and hide his shame and humiliation, the exposed afflicted covers his upper lip or perhaps moustache.
Kaës (
As non-verbal text, screen or mirror the skin communicates, reflects and mediates between the individual and the collective as superego (Anzieu
One could speculate about whether the exclusion of the afflicted was due to possible ritual contagion or due to his appearance which then would have signified something negative, such as death or a hidden (unconscious?) sin, inscribed on his skin.
In addition, the skin speaks about the internal condition of the body and the self. The ancient Israelites were interested in the external manifestation of inner states (Hallpike
Whether these illnesses, if psychosomatic, betray the psychological state of the individual or even of the community of which they could have been projective identifications, remains open to the ‘readers’ of the skin.
Pathological body-boundaries replace and represent threatened ego-boundaries as both excluding boundary and contact site (Hirsch
The Egyptians believed drinking the milk of a pig, perhaps an animal sacred to them, produced scale disease. Analogies occur in other cultures across the world where people are believed to descend from certain animals or plants which are then deemed sacred or totemic. Eating these animals or plants would allegedly likewise produce skin diseases. Touching a sacred and therefore dangerous object often requires washing oneself and the clothes worn during the act before entering society, a city or a house, all symbols of the body in the collective sphere (Frazer
That an ancient culture could regress psychologically in the form of somatisation and betray having touched an unclean object having made the forbidden contact should not be excluded as a possibility.
Both lesions, a בּהַרֶֶת [shiny mark] and a שְׂאֵת [discoloration], can be a chronic צָרֶבֶת [scar] from either a שְׁחיִן [boil] in Leviticus 13:23 or a מִכוְתַ [burn] in Leviticus 13:28. They record and reflect remnants from history to the bearer and to the world, a history that is part of identity.
A loss of the capacity to retain traces or the ideal of the collective to which the individual belongs can lead to anxieties of stigmatisation by the superego as a sentence of aesthetic mutilation.
Stimulation of the body through touch, contact and social care happens at the skin surface to energise and enliven it. To compensate for a lack itching as variability between charge and tension in the skin can be substituted. This would raise the awareness of the afflicted to the crisis that is unfolding on and in his very self due to the lack of this function. When the difference between the internal and external becomes too high an anxiety about explosion from the inside, whence most stimuli arrive at the skin surface, can result (Anzieu
Touch, proximity and distance play an essential role in Leviticus 13–14. The word, נָגַע [mark, wound, plague, heavy touch, stroke], or its derivatives occurs 47 times in Leviticus 13 and 14 times in chapter 14, that is, more than two-thirds of the total number of mentions in the Hebrew Bible. To that can be added the inspecting and exposing gaze of the priest, who had to look at the whole and therefore naked body of the suspect, if Leviticus 13:12 is to be taken literally, perhaps experienced as intrusive by the object of examination who is never reported as having spoken even a word. All these forms of aggressive, harsh touching form a contrast to the untouchability of the afflicted precisely as defence against the condition of his skin which threatens aggression in the form of contamination. Yet even the aggressive touch still energises the afflicted as worthy of being touched, despite arousing hyperexcitation.
Whereas the recharging function ‘invites’ stimuli, the most superficial layer of epidermis now protects against excessive stimuli such as aggressive penetration and being flooded (Anzieu
The untouchability of those suffering from a skin disease due to their threatening invasion is shown by their exclusion from society although the priest remains an indirect link and mediator between them and also between the sufferer and God especially in chapter 14. The main prohibition of both obsessional neurosis and the taboo against killing a totem and sexual relationships between members of the same totem group is touching, both literally and in the broadest sense, such as through displacement.
Apart from the eruption from the inside, scale disease is seen as an infiltration from the outside and skin colour change (showing only the potential for the diseases), white or yellow hair, the depth of the affliction (most important), raw flesh and its extent are the four factors determining the seriousness of the intrusion (Milgrom
The exclusion following scale diseases as associations with death and difference and the fact that it is mentioned as a curse on boundary stones as a seal to a contract (Milgrom
Lang (
The wide-spread occurrence of these ‘diseases’ across different continents and times as punishments for having transgressed ‘boundaries’ makes Milgrom (
These boundaries are extended through clothing and other layers. Psychoanalytically, ‘layering’ could be interpreted as development: moving away from direct and bare exposure to protective sublimation. The degrees of entering into the social body can be discerned from Leviticus 14:8 where the purified is allowed back into the camp but not directly into his tent or into the tent of meeting which follows only after the ‘threshold’ ceremonies in Leviticus 14:11.23. This has parallels with the gradual access of priests to the holy in their ordination process in Leviticus 8, marking their ‘migration across symbolic boundaries’ (Willis
Clothes are like another layer of skin. That is why they are also associated with each other in Leviticus 11:32 and Leviticus 15:17. In fact, in Leviticus 11:32 both are mentioned with a sac and vessels as well, reminding of the maintenance function. Like the skin they also need to be washed to mark a fresh start (
Garments as symbolic extensions of the body, in fact, all fabric covers and containers even including the walls of houses could be afflicted by צָרַעַת (Leviticus 13:47–59; 14:34–53, 55). This was probably mycotic growths such as fungi, considered by Akkadian texts to be evil (Caplice
Apart from being infected in both skin and clothing the object of scrutiny, inspection and examination is exposed to nakedness on several levels. The association or even etymological link (cf. Haupt
That the clothes of the הַמְּצֹרָע [the one who has a scale disease] and any other garments, fabric and leather which has a scale disease need to be washed in Leviticus 13:6, 34, 54, 55, 56, 58 like the skin in Leviticus 14:8.9, suggests a new beginning as new identities.
Shaving in Leviticus 13:33, even of a man’s beard and eye-brows in Leviticus 14:9, undressing to wash his clothes in Leviticus 13:6, 34, 54, 55, 56, 58(bis) and 14:8–9, 47 and himself in 14:8, 9 before redressing, suggest a shedding of the skin symbolising some kind of rebirth, perhaps tying in with Leviticus 12.
The annual shedding of a snake’s skin symbolising initiation and transformation, seems to be simulated by the flaking of skin with scale disease and by the shaving and washing of the purifying הַצָּרוּעַ [the one who has scale disease]. Even alopecia in Leviticus 13:40–41 suggests a denuding but all these states of nakedness are considered as clean or pure as opposed to nakedness as exposure (
The signals on the skin communicate the messages of the excommunicated and mediate the distance and separation between the insiders and the outsiders: just as excretions are leaking from the individual body and these ulcerations make it unclean in Leviticus 13:45, so הַנֶּגַע [{the one with} the mark] now becomes הַצָּרוּעַ [the one who has scale disease] and ‘leaks’ from the collective body. He now also changes his behaviour and appearance by פרְֻמיִם [tearing] his clothes, having פָרוּעַ [loosened] (the hair of) his head and יעַטְֶה (cover[ing], trim[ming]) his moustache (Milgrom
When the person is ‘healed’, he gets yet another new identity, that of הַמְּצֹרָע [the one with a scale disease], the technical term reserved for the purification ritual and period in Leviticus 14 which is exactly the same as for the corpse-contaminated person and so associates him with death: it was as if he had ‘touched’ death and so was not to be touched, but now welcomed back to life. This association with death is then displaced by killing (the word occurs 7 times!) animals as sacrifice in Leviticus 14:5, 6, 13(bis), 19, 25, 50. In addition, after purification, shaving in Leviticus 14:8, 9 would have been a temporary message to the world of the former state of the person and the transition to a new person the afflicted has gone through.
Purity seems to mean ‘insidership’, membership and belonging. The individual can only find personal identity in a group. This notion is apparent from the fact that a גֵּר [proselyte] was excluded from a אָדָם [person] in the legislation in Leviticus 13:2, 9 (Milgrom
This function has to do with being in touch with reality by being receptive to its messages and by integrating them (Anzieu
This function is clearly undermined by the biblical text which never mentions anything of the subjective and sensory experience of the afflicted. No pain, itching or other tactile discomforts are raised. These are therefore clearly irrelevant and unimportant to the author or authors. This confirms once again that the collective skin is not sufficiently containing: it does not reflect and thus confirm the individuality of the afflicted which is limited to belonging thanks to conformity (
This function is further undermined when the afflicted is excluded from physical and social touch which would have confirmed his identity in terms of belonging to the collective and would have given him a ‘common sense’. The skin as texture is well covered in Leviticus 13–14: a smooth, spotless skin remains the collective ideal to look at and live with, and is therefore also the aesthetic norm.
The prohibition of physical touch is somehow compensated for by the symbolic touching of the gaze (cf. Anzieu
The interruptions in the skin through eruptions become like additional orifices where additional libidinal energy is invested as base for sexualisation. Outgrowths can produce hypersensitivity as the epidermis is thinner than usual, leading to direct contact with the mucus membrane. Without this external arousal the libidinal recharging of the psyche, that is, preserving its inner tension, is lost. When human touch is lost, it could lead to a more narcissistic than libidinal investment where the person could become so self-centred that he believes himself to be invulnerable and indulges in perverse sexuality where pain is experienced as pleasure. The pleasures derived from some skin sensations stimulate sexuality (Anzieu
The views of Anzieu (who also worked on
Collective belonging within boundaries asserts identity through exclusion of the other. The sense of having been penetrated must have resulted from being intruded upon by the Babylonians, a
The skin as site of both contact and contagion, by both sacred and profane ‘objects’, and therefore also of purification (De Vaux
The Hebrew Bible hardly mentions national, but rather reinforces legal, intragroup borders. There often seems to be a centripetal regression to a reduced, almost ‘anorexic’ though sacred, centre of authenticity, the psychoanalytic
If Leviticus, where by far the most awareness of the skin surfaces, reached its final form in the postexilic Persian period (Gerstenberger
After the return of some exiled elites from Babylonia and some refugees from neighbouring countries not only was the ‘heart’ of Jerusalem, the (Second) Temple with its emphasis on blood sacrifice, built in about 515 BCE (Ezr 6:15) and rebuilt in about 458 BCE under Ezra who also enforced the law of Moses (who ironically married a
Heckl (
The fact that the rules became more relaxed with time reinforces our hypothesis that they had been given momentum by the trauma: the Rabbis seem to regard them as less serious than the earlier Qumran Scrolls (Harrington
This would later have allowed openness to others but then perhaps as imperialistic inclusivism where the self is the centre to which they should make their pilgrimages.
The skin in Leviticus 13–14 remains fragile and penetrable. It is the interface where the world observed, was met, let in or blocked out. These interactions seem to be the case in controlling the skin and to depend on the collective psychic condition of Judah at the time. In the postexilic Jewish community the legislation about the skin is in itself a kind of skin, a border which may not be transgressed and which prevents any trespassing. It keeps the inside together and the outsiders out.
The skin in Leviticus is therefore a palimpsest of meanings in terms of its psychic functions simultaneously covering and discovering a multiplicity of possible suggestions: it is not only part of self-presentation and appearance, but also site of contact and conflict. It is the area of either intimate or cruel touch, and it suggests identity and difference.
The author declares that he has no financial or personal relationships which may have inappropriately influenced him in writing this article.