HOWARD T. KARSNER g8i 



pigs. By the use of perfusion methods, and the uterine strip, both with active and 

 passive anaphylaxis, WeiP has given most cogent support to the cellular theory of 

 anaphylaxis. He has also shown that the reaction follows in a general way the Danysz 

 effect. It has been shown quantitatively by Coca and by Von Fcnyvessy and Freund' 

 that animals react when there is an insufficient quantity of circulating antibodies to 

 account for the phenomenon. 



Gay and Southard^ were of the opinion that the reaction is principally in the 

 nervous system, a view supported by Besredka^ and others. The participation of 

 smooth muscle without the intervention of the central nervous system is unques- 

 tioned. WeiP held strongly to the view that the liver is largely concerned. By the use 

 of dye "blockade" of the reticulo-endothelial system, Isaacs'" was unable to demon- 

 strate any alteration of the reaction. 



THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS 

 PRECIPITINS AND ANAPHYLAXIS 



The features of a supposed identity of precipitin and sensitizing substance in 

 anaphylaxis have been referred to above. A precipitating immune serum can pas- 

 sively sensitize an animal to the homologous protein, and the sensitization is generally 

 quantitatively parallel to the precipitin titre. Weil showed that the washed precipi- 

 tate can confer passive and also active sensitization. Coca was unable to confirm 

 this but did not contradict the underlying assumption. The fact that heating a 

 precipitating serum to 70° C. for one-half hour completely inhibits its precipitating 

 capacity, but only slightly reduces its sensitizing power, was interpreted by Weil, on 

 the basis of the side-chain theory, to indicate that the special binding group of the 

 precipitin has been destroyed, a group not necessary for sensitization. Nevertheless, 

 this is an irregularity in action, which, together with the work of Falk and Caulfield^ 

 showing lack of parallelism between precipitation titre and sensitizing capacity, must 

 indicate that the hypothesis needs further explanation before final acceptance. Kraus* 

 points out that the guinea pig, excellent for work in anaphylaxis, is a poor producer 

 of precipitin, that rabbits may produce a powerful sensitizer without high-titre pre- 

 cipitin, and that goats produce precipitin readily but have a serum incapable of con- 

 ferring passive sensitization. 



Opie,5 in extension of the work of others, has studied the relations of antigen and 

 precipitin in vitro and in vivo and has found that there must be an equilibrium in which 



'Weil, R.: /. Med. Research, 27, 497. 1912-13; ibid., 30, 87, 199. 1914; /. Immunol., 2, 399, 

 469. 1917. 



= von Fenyvessy, B., and Freund, J.: Ztschr.f. Immiinitatsjorsch. u. e.xper. Therap., 22, 59. 1914. 



3 Gay, F. P., and Southard, E. E.: loc. cil. 



''Besredka, A. : loc. cil. 



5 Weil, R.: J. Immunol., 2, 525, 571. 1917. 



* Isaacs, M. L.: Proc. Soc. Exper. Biol. 6" Med., 23, 185. 1925. 

 ' Falk, I. S., and Caulfield, M. F.: loc. cil. 



* Kraus, R., and Levaditi, C: Handbuch der Technik und MelhodiJi der Immunitdlsforschung. 

 Jena: Fischer, 1908-11. 



9 Opie, E. L.: /. Immunol., 8, 19, 55. 1923. 



