THERAPEUTIC IMMUNIZATION IN MAN 521 



protein were purely specific. Jobling, who has recently summarized 

 most of this work, calls attention to the fact that Matthes 178 as 

 early as 1895 showed that the effect of tuberculin injection could 

 be obtained equally well with deuteroproteose. From that time on, 

 many observations have been made to show that often profound 

 physiological effects could be produced in human beings and animals 

 suffering from infectious diseases, if they were treated not with 

 specific antigen but with proteins and protein derivatives of many 

 sources. 



The work that the writer did with Hiss on the injection of 

 leucocytic extracts is a case in point. Similar in significance prob- 

 ably are the results obtained by the injection of substances such as 

 the filtrate of bacterial cultures, commercially sold as phylacogens, 

 the intramuscular milk injection practiced by Schmidt 179 and the 

 injection of various ferments, reported by a number of writers 

 throughout the literature of the past ten or fifteen years. Into the 

 same category fall the favorable reports supposed to have been ob- 

 tained in syphilitics in tuberculin exhibits by Blach. 180 Perhaps 

 the clearest example of this principle has been obtained in connection 

 with attempts at vaccine therapy in typhoid fever. Attempts to 

 cure typhoid fever by the injection of typhoid bacilli date back to 

 Fraenkel, who treated it as early as 1893, and since then, as we have 

 seen, extensive study has been made on this subject by Petruschky, 

 Isletter, and others. Ichikawa in 1912 and Boinet in 1914 obtained 

 astonishing results by the use of sensitized vaccine, the former being 

 the first to introduce the intravenous method of injection. The 

 results of the injection intravenously into a patient suffering from 

 typhoid fever have consisted in rapid falling of temperature, often 

 followed by a chill, with occasionally rapid general improvement of 

 the patient. 



Gay, too, has recently made such observations by the methods 

 of Ichikawa, and most of these writers were inclined to believe that 

 their opinion was effective by some sort of specific reaction. Doubt 

 has been cast upon this point of view, however, by observations such 

 as those of Kraus. Ichikawa alone had some doubt of this, as is 

 indicated by the fact that he injected typhoid bacilli into some of his 

 paratyphoid patients with like results. Kraus subsequently ob- 

 tained similar effects by injecting colon bacilli into typhoid patients 

 and used non-specific bacterial virus with good results on cases of 

 pyocyaneus infection and upon a single streptococcus puerperal septi- 

 cemia. Leudke injected typhoid patients with non-bacterial proteose 

 and Jobling and Petersen have obtained very marked reactions in 



178 Matthes, M. Deutsch. Arch. f. klin. Med., 1895, Vol. 45. 



179 Schmidt, R. Med. Klin., 1910, No. 43. 



180 Blach, M. Wien. klin. Wchnschr., 1915, No. 49. 



