To the Editor: Against the background of their own work on morphogenic variants in schizophrenia (1997), Drs. Trixler and Ti comment on our study on minor physical anomalies in 60 patients with schizophrenia, 21 normal siblings of these patients, and 75 demographically similar normal comparison subjects and raise issues concerning 1) the reliability of the Waldrop scale, 2) the relevance of items on the Waldrop scale for the development of schizophrenia, and 3) their own approach for attempting to establish the timing of insults or maldevelopment related to schizophrenia. Our study employed the Waldrop scale and 23 additional minor physical anomalies identified by means of a review of the pediatric literature. Our experience is that quite satisfactory reliability can be obtained for both the Waldrop scale and additional items when researchers train together and decide on the operational criteria used to define particular minor physical anomalies. For example, we find very high levels of agreement, not on total score, but on measurements of extent of curved fifth finger, actual head circumference, interpupil distance, and the like. Many specific minor physical anomalies occur relatively uncommonly even in select patient groups and even when percentage agreement between assessors is very high; establishing nominal reliability expressed in terms of kappa may be difficult because of limitations in the marginal frequencies within the group studied.