ANAPHYLAXIS 375 



King 54 failed to confirm this, and the observations of other writers 

 seem to bear them out. However, when we consider that Ascoli, 

 Oppenheimer, and others have shown that proteins fed to animals in 

 large quantities may be subsequently demonstrated not only in the 

 circulating blood but occasionally even in the urine by means of the 

 precipitin reaction, there seems to be little room for doubting that 

 antigen may enter the circulation unchanged, though possibly only 

 under abnormal local conditions of the intestine. This, together 

 with Eosenau and Anderson's demonstration of the extremely small 

 amount of antigen necessary to sensitize, furnishes all the conditions 

 necessary for anaphylaxis by way of the intestinal canal. 



A study made by Lesne and Dreyfus 55 seems to us to have ex- 

 plained the contradictory results of other workers on this phase of 

 the problem. Without being able to associate the destruction of the 

 sensitizing function with either the gastric or pancreatic secretions, 

 they were nevertheless successful in showing that sensitization could 

 be carried out regularly if the antigen were injected afterj^arotomy^ 

 into the large intestine, whereas similar injections into the stomach or 

 small intestine were negative. In these experiments we must take 

 into consideration that the conditions following laparotomy, such as 

 temporary intestinal atony and congestion, may have exerted con- 

 siderable influence upon the positive outcome of their large intestine 

 injections. Whereas they do not, therefore, permit us to assume the 

 possibility of sensitization through the normal alimentary canal, they 

 nevertheless confirm the assumption of the possibility of sensitiza- 

 tion by this path under the influence of slightly abnormal local con- 

 ditions. 



In this connection Besredka's 56 experiments on the production 

 of anti-anaphylaxis by the intestinal administration of protein are 

 of interest. He found that, if sensitized animals were given 5 c. c. 

 of the antigen (milk) by rectum, they were thereby protected from 

 the reaction following in controls upon a second injection. In his 

 later experiments with egg white it appeared that the protection 

 could also be conferred by mouth, but that in this case it developed 

 more slowly, it being necessary to wait two days after ingestion be- 

 fore the anti-anaphylaxis had developed sufficiently to protect. Since 

 attempts by mouth were not as rapidly successful as those per rec- 

 tum, it is clear that these facts are in keeping with Lesne and Drey- 

 fus' results in showing that the antigen is probably absorbed chiefly 

 or solely from the large intestine. Lesne and Dreyfus sensitized 

 by way of the intestine, and administered the second or toxogenic 

 dose intravenously, and since, as we shall see, minute doses may 



54 McClintock and King. Jour. Inf. Dis., 3, 1906. See section on normal 

 antibodies. 



55 Lesne and Dreyfus. C. E. de la Soc. Biol., Vol. 70, p. 136, 1911. 

 56 Besredka. C. E. de la Soc. Biol., Vol. 65, 1908; Vol. 70, 1911. 



