2 ANAPHYLAXIS AND ANTI-ANAPHYLAXIS 



charges against serum therapy, and raising the bogey 

 of mishaps resulting from anaphylaxis whenever an 

 injection of serum is to be made ? 



Anaphylaxis has become quite the fashion. There 

 is no doubt that in the realm of general pathology 

 there are few subjects invested with so captivating 

 an interest. As we are still aiding in its evolution, 

 there necessarily remain some obscure points about 

 it which excite the imagination of scientists. More- 

 over, the interest attaching to the problem is not 

 entirely speculative. On certain sides it touches our 

 most vital problems — namely, serum therapy and 

 even alimentation. 



What constitutes the most striking trait in ana- 

 phylaxis is its quasi-paradoxical character. This is 

 perplexing to one who has been brought up in the 

 traditions of immunity, and at one time made us 

 speak of anaphylaxis as reversed immunity. 



Indeed, how should we otherwise regard this 

 strange fact that the person who reacts to a first 

 injection reacts to the second much more strongly 

 than to the first ? On the contrary, has not the 

 practice of vaccination accustomed us to see injec- 

 tions borne with all the greater tolerance the more 

 frequently they are made ? 



Take, for instance, the case of a person who at 

 some time in his life has been injected subcutaneously 

 with therapeutic serum for curative or preventive 

 purposes. A month, a year, or several years, elapse. 

 That person has completely forgotten that he was 

 injected. One day a fresh injection of serum is con- 

 sidered necessary. It is made; and the needle is 

 hardly withdrawn from the vein or the spinal cavity 

 before a sequence of symptoms occurs — not always 

 happily — that creates a tragic impression. We be- 

 lieve we are witnessing an acute toxaemia ending in 

 death in a few moments. 



