EXCLUSION OF ADRENALS 305 



through the adrenals, the glycosuric puncture was studied 

 from this view point by quite a number of researchers. 



Let us consider for a moment what objective facts we 

 ought to demand in order to regard as proved such a thor- 

 oughly complicated relation as the above mentioned 

 hypothesis assumes. 



We should expect in the first place that if the adrenals 

 were removed the glycosuric puncture would be without its 

 customary effect. We might further very properly suppose 

 that a massive discharge of this substance would be fol- 

 lowed by a noticeable impoverishment in the adrenal medulla 

 of its pressure-raising chromogen. And finally we ought 

 to require evidence that the sugar puncture really is fol- 

 lowed by an excessive presence of suprarenin in the blood. 

 Closer examination may now be made as to what results 

 experiments have afforded which may be applied to each 

 one of these postulates. 



Failure of Effect of Glycosuric Puncture After Exclusion 

 of the Adrenals. The first point to be made (determined 

 coincidently by A. Meyers, E. Landau and E. H. Kahn) is 

 that the puncture is no longer capable of producing glyco- 

 suria when the adrenals have both been extirpated. This 

 is all the more notable in case of operated animals which 

 survive the operation for some length of time and are in 

 good health. In such animals, too, no hyperglycaemia is 

 met from splanchnic irritation. 18 The plausible explanation 

 that in animals deprived of their adrenals there is simply a 

 reduction in the glycogen supplies may hold in case of rats 

 and dogs, 19 but apparently not in case of rabbits, which may 

 survive the bilateral removal of the adrenals for as much 



18 J. J. R. Macleod and R. G. Pearce, Amer. Jour, of Physiol., 29, 419, 1912; 

 cf. also the diuretin experiments of M. Nishi (Pharmacol. Instit., Vienna), 

 Arch. f. exper. Pathol., 61, 401, 1909. 



19 O. Schwarz (E. Pick's Lab., Vienna), Pfliiger's Arch., 134, 259, 1910; 

 O. Porges (v. Noorden's Clinic, Vienna), Zeitschr. f. klin. Med., 69, 3-4, 1909; 

 70, 1910. 

 20 



