29 



These investigations are advanced by Scheller (I, 2, 3) and 

 Pfeiffer (4) as a weighty argument in favour of the primary 

 importance of Pfeiffer's bacillus in influenza. 



In opposition to this Seligmann & Wolf very much doubt 

 whether there really was a true influenza epidemic at the lime 

 Scheller made his investigations. They maintain that at the date 

 in question there was no general outbreak of influenza in Prussia 

 and that in the winter of 1906—07 when according to Schemer 

 the epidemic was at its height, fewer deaths were reported in 

 Konigsberg from influenza than in the following years. 



Eyre (London), in the period 1902—09 found Pfeiffer's bacillus 

 in 20 out of 102 cases of primary broncho-pneumonia and in 13 

 out of 62 cases of broncho-pneumonia complicating other diseases, — 

 in measles in 4 out of 20, in whooping-cough in 3 out of 11 

 and in diphtheria in 6 out of 18 cases. 



Turner & Lewis (Edinburgh 1910) frequently obtained Pfeif- 

 fer's bacillus in disease of the accessory sinuses. 



Hastings & Niles (New York) during the years 1903—10 found 

 Pfeiffer's bacilli in 5 out of 17 influenza cases but only in a few 

 cases of other diseases of the respiratory tract. 



Holt (New York) in 1909—10 looked for Pfeiffer's bacillus in 

 530 patients and in 35 autopsies, and found it very generally present 

 (as the most abundant organism after Pneumococcus) in the winter 

 and early spring, but it completely disappeared in the course of 

 the summer. It was found in pneumonia (in 47 out of 124 patients), 

 bronchitis etc. (63 out of 133), tuberculosis (6 out of 23), olilis 

 (4 out of 57), various diseases outside the respiratory organs (19 

 out of 254). There is no mention of an epidemic outbreak of in- 

 fluenza. He claims to have shown a certain relation between the 

 occurrence of the bacillus and the clinical symptoms. The lalter 

 however could hardly be termed classical influenza symptoms and 

 he concludes by saying that „a much more extended study and 

 many scries of observations must be made before it will be possible 

 to establish relationships between bronchial or nasopharyngeal cul- 

 lures and clinical symptoms in respiratory infections". 



Selter (1) (Bonn) as late as the winter months of 1902 and 

 1903 frequently found Pfeiffer's bacillus in sputum examinations 

 but never in great numbers and hardly ever by direct microscopic 

 examination, but usually by cultural methods in association with 

 other bacteria. In the succeeding years in spite of numerous at- 

 tempts each winter he could no longer find it. 



In the winter of 1908—09 an extensive „influenza" epidemic 

 broke out in Bonn which was thought to have come from France. 

 The clinicians asserted that it could in no way be distinguished 

 from pandemic influenza. Neither Selter nor Walb found Pfeif- 

 fer's bacillus in any of the cases, but Pneumococcus was constantly 

 present (or a similar organism) which was also put down as I lie 

 cause of this epidemic in a French publication. 



