5io 



SCIENCE PROGRESS 



QUOTATION FROM PAGE 1J 



In the first class we place the bacillus 

 of bovine tuberculosis and the bacillus 

 of Group I. of human tuberculosis. 

 These exhibit the same range of growth 

 on various media and the same cor- 

 related variations in microscopical 

 features. They are in all respects one 

 and the same. 



QUOTATION FROM PAGE 28 



In three of the cases in which we 

 obtained tuberculous mesenteric glands 

 we were able to study not only the 

 mesenteric glands themselves but also 

 tuberculous lungs and other organs ; 

 and the results obtained from these 

 other tuberculous organs were identical 

 with the results obtained from the 

 mesenteric glands ; the tuberculosis in 

 all the affected organs was the same 

 bovine tuberculosis, one form only of 

 bacillus having been found. The bacilli 

 of bovine source had not only attacked 

 the mesenteric glands to which they 

 had been brought directly by absorption 

 from the alimentary canal but had also 

 invaded distant organs, being carried 

 thither by the blood-stream or the 

 lymphatics. We may conclude beyond 

 doubt that the whole disease was caused 

 by the same bovine tubercle bacilli : 

 the children died of bovine tuberculosis 

 caused by bacilli introduced by way of 

 the alimentary canal and probably con- 

 veyed through cows' milk. 



Before discussing these two passages it is necessary to 

 emphasise one point. The word bovine means nothing whatever 

 in regard to the source of infection. The term " bovine bacillus " 

 is a term indicating that the bacillus belongs to a type possess- 

 ing special features in regard to its cultural characteristics and 

 its relative degree of virulence. The word " bovine " is a 

 laboratory colloquialism used to signify that variety of bacillus 

 which attacks human beings and also attacks bovines to dis- 

 tinguish it from that variety of bacillus which is, as a rule, not 

 virulent enough to attack bovines. A physician, for example, 

 observes in his laboratory that the tubercle bacillus infecting a 

 particular child is of the " bovine" type. Does he conclude that 

 the child got it from the cow? Of course he does not. He 

 concludes nothing whatever in regard to the source of infection. 



Do the Royal Commissioners disagree with this? On the 

 contrary, they entirely agree with it. When they find the 

 bovine bacillus, can they distinguish it from Group I. of human 

 tuberculosis ? Can they say this bacillus came from a cow and 

 not from a human being ? Of course they cannot and on page 27 



