1550 Journal of Applied Microscopy 



Prof. Heuppe (^Ber. Klin. Woch., Aug. 2) is also positive in his opposition to 

 Prof. Koch's views, insisting that the evidence in our possession is quite 

 sufficient to demonstrate that the disease may pass from animals to men, and insist- 

 ing that the differences between the bacilli in the two animals are far less than the 

 differences between the avian and bovine bacillus, which experiment has shown 

 to be only cultural conditions of the same organism. Among others who hold 

 a similar position may be mentioned McFadyen, Ravenel, Nocard, Brouardel, 

 Bang, Boullanger. Without giving further references of this sort, it may be 

 stated that the majority of bacteriologists who have expressed any opinion at 

 the present time hold a view somewhat as follows : The bacillus from man is 

 very slightly, if at all, pathogenic for cattle. This, however, does not indicate 

 that they are different species of bacteria, but simply that they are different cul- 

 tural varieties of the same organism due to growth in different environment. 

 The second conclusion of Prof. Koch, that human tuberculosis is not derived 

 from cattle, is quite generally discredited. It is insisted that Prof. Koch drew 

 this conclusion without sufficient evidence ; that primary intestinal tuberculosis 

 is common among children ; and that there are sufficient instances of direct 

 transference from cattle to man to show that such a source of the disease is 

 possible. There is thus a general tendency to discredit the second position of 

 Prof. Koch. 



On the other hand, some have expressed themselves as agreeing in general 

 with Prof. Koch's views. Prof. Baumgarten ( Bcr. Klin. IVoch., Sept. 2 ) is 

 inclined to accept the position of Koch. He had in 1893 found it impossible to 

 produce the bovine disease with human bacilli. He instances a long series of 

 attempts made to inoculate a certain patient suffering from cancer with tubercu- 

 losis by the use of a culture from cattle. These all proved futile because, as he 

 believes, the bovine bacillus was used rather than the human bacillus. He, how- 

 ever, is inclined to regard the organisms as of the same species, though different 

 cultural varieties, but he believes that the danger of transference of the disease 

 from cattle to man is very small. Heubner is inclined to side with Prof. Koch, 

 thinking with him that the danger to man from bovine tuberculosis is slight 

 although perhaps it is too early to make generalizations. 



Dr. Ostertag {Zeif. f. Fl. u. Milch ffyg., XI, 353) has given one of the 

 most complete discussions of the present aspect of the question. While very 

 careful to make no positive statements, he points out an unfortunate result that 

 Prof. Koch's lecture has had in tending to allay the care taken by farmers in 

 regard to the treatment of tuberculous animals. He emphasizes the fact that 

 we have as yet no proof, indeed, no good reason, for believing that Prof. Koch's 

 position is a correct one, and until this question can be positively settled we 

 should proceed exactly as we have done in the last few years, upon the assump- 

 tion that the disease can be transmitted from cattle to men, and that bovine 

 tuberculosis is therefore a serious danger for mankind. 



All who have discussed the question recognize that the conclusions which 

 Prof. Koch advanced can only be settled by further experiment and discussion. 

 Already a number of persons have offered themselves for experiment and have 

 expressed their willingness to be inoculated with bovine bacilli in order to dem- 



