SALIVARY GLANDS, STOMACH AND INTESTINES 743 



and Hackett (a) (6) (1916) reported that the aqueous extracts prepared 

 from liver, when injected subcutaneously, cause a very vigorous pancreatic 

 secretion. It is, however, not certain whether this secretion is a direct ef- 

 fect, or secondary one due to a primary gastric stimulation. They found 

 thyroid and thymus to yield less active extracts and pituitary and parathy- 

 roid were inactive. These authors used dogs with permanent pancreatic 

 fistula for [heir physiological tests. Uhlmann (1918), as a result of a series 

 of studies on the physiological effect of a orypan," a commercial vitamin 

 preparation prepared from rice polishings, arrives at very sweeping con- 

 clusions as to the pharmacological action of the antineuritic vitamin. He 

 finds that this extract, when injected intravenously in the rabbit, causes 

 salivation, and that the subcutaneous, intravenous or oral administration 

 stimulates the gastric and pancreatic secretions. He concludes that it 

 acts mainly on the parasympathetic nervous system, secondary on the 

 digestive glands, and lastly that it causes an increased tone of the mus- 

 culature of the entire body. He finds this activity distributed in rice 

 polishings, spinach, nettles, meat, oats, yeast, clover and cabbage. He 

 further found atropin to inhibit all of these physiological responses. 

 These studies, together with those already cited under gastrin, do not by 

 any means clearly prove either side of the controversy between Bayliss 

 and Starling on the one hand and Popielski on the other. It is evident 

 that the isolation of the pure substance, together with careful quantitative 

 physiological studies on unanesthetized animals, are the only means of 

 definitely deciding this important question. 



Specificity of Action. Here the evidence is on the whole by no means 

 clearly in favor of the Bayliss and Starling school. Favoring their view, 

 we have many negative reports on pancreatic secretion with gastrin prep- 

 arations, as already discussed above ; also some negative results as to gastric 

 and salivary secretion following the injection of secretin, as shown by 

 Bayliss and Starling and Dale and Laidlaw and, lastly, the in vitro studies 

 suggesting a specific action of pancreas tissue on secretin. 



Under the discussion of the specific distribution of gastrin activity, it 

 was shown that acid extracts of the duodenal mucous membrane had been 

 found, by various observers, to cause gastric as well as pancreatic secretion. 

 It is, of course, possible, but not very probable, that the positive results as 

 to gastric secretion may have been the secondary result of a primary 

 pancreatic secretion. Still other secretions have been found to be stim- 

 ulated by extracts thus prepared from duodenal mucous membrane. Thus 

 Alessandro (1912) finds such an extract to stimulate the flow of lachrymal 

 fluid. Frouin finds it to cause a sudden and marked secretion of in- 

 testinal juice. Botazzi and Gabrieli (1905) find this stimulating effect 

 also, but that it continues over a longer time period. Downs and Eddy 

 (1919) found that the intravenous injection of a secretin solution stim- 

 ulates the flow of bile very decidedly, and they -also noted a marked 



