ANAPHYLAXIS 391 



When a foreign antigen is injected into an animal the assimilation 

 takes place by means of its entering into relation with the body cells 

 by becoming attached to an atom-complex or cell receptor for which 

 the particular antigen has affinity. In consequence this atom-com- 

 plex, side chain, or receptor is eliminated from usefulness and the cell 

 is forced to produce another or others like it. In ordinary immuniza- 

 tion overproduction results, the receptors are cast off, and, in the 

 circulation, represent the antibodies which we have studied. ISTow it 

 is conceivable that slight stimulation of the cells, insufficient to in- 

 duce a very extensive receptor formation, might lead to the increase 

 of receptors without leading to their extrusion from the cell into the 

 circulation. The condition of the cell in consequence is one of in- 

 creased receptor apparatus or affinity for the particular antigen, and 

 consequently greater vulnerability, if, the antigen, as in the case of 

 the toxins, is a harmful substance. Adapting this ingenious idea to 

 the explanation of serum anaphylaxis, Friedberger, 14 in his first 

 theory, combined the conceptions of antibody formation and cellular 

 localization. He identified the anaphylactic reaction with the precip- 

 itins and advanced the opinion that the anaphylactic reaction was a 

 sort of intracellular precipitin reaction. 



In the light of the evidence against the histogenic conceptions of 

 anaphylaxis which we have mentioned above, and especially because 

 of his own discoveries upon the anaphylactic poisons, Friedberger 

 has abandoned this view, and no more need be said about it at pres- 

 ent. However, his identification of the precipitins with the ana- 

 phylactic antibody is of great interest in that it stimulated much care- 

 ful analytical work on the antibodies present in anaphylactic sera. 15 



Thus, the assumption that anaphylaxis was in truth the result of 

 the union of an antigen with its specific antibody gained much sup- 

 port when Doerr and Russ 18 succeeded in applying quantitative 

 methods to the study of the anaphylactic antibody. Their methods 

 consisted in producing precipitating sera in rabbits. With these they 

 then passively sensitized guinea pigs, subsequently testing them with 

 the antigen 24 hours later. To arrive at quantitative results they 

 developed two reliable methods. These consisted in : 1. Intraperi- 



14 Friedberger. Zeitschr. f. Immunitatsforschimg, Vol. 2, 1909, p. 208. 



15 The idea of identifying the anaphylactic antibody with the precipitins, 

 indeed, had been advanced before this by Hamburger and Moro, 16 who be- 

 lieved that the first injection gave rise to precipitins these with the antigen 

 formed precipitates which then caused embrolic obstructions. Such a purely 

 mechanical theory soon had to be abandoned, however, because the injection 

 of massive reemulsified precipitates did not seem to cause illness in animals 

 and precipitins could not be demonstrated in the sera of sensitive animals. 17 



16 Hamburger and Moro. Wien. klin. Woch., Vol. 16, No. 15, 1903. 



17 Marf an and LePlay. Cited from Levaditi. 



18 Doerr and Russ. Zeitschr. f. Immunitatsforschung, Vol. 3, pp. 181 

 and 706, 1909. 



