388 INFECTION AND RESISTANCE 



might stimulate an actual difference in heat resistance. In fact, this 

 is the view expressed by Wells 12 and borne out by experiments car- 

 ried out by Doerr and Russ. 



Wells, too, confirms the identity of sensitizing and toxic sub- 

 stance by his experiments on the influence of tryptic digestion upon 

 these properties of the antigen. He concludes that both sensitizing 

 and intoxicating properties are attacked and slowly decrease as the 

 coagulable protein disappears. 



As to that aspect of Besredka's theory which deals with the 

 indirect participation of the central nervous system, his arguments 

 are based mainly on the fact that ether narcosis seemed, in his 

 experiments, to prevent anaphylactic shock when animals were 

 deeply anesthetized during the second injection, and also upon the 

 regularity, severity, and speed with which anaphylactic symptoms 

 follow injections directly into the brain. The former contention 

 regarding narcotics cannot, by any means, be accepted as yet, since 

 Rosenau and Anderson failed to confirm it and claim that ether 

 narcosis merely masks the symptoms but does not prevent death. 

 If we admit the beneficial effects of ether, moreover, it may well be 

 that this is accomplished by relaxation of the bronchial spasms, 

 known, since Auer and Lewis, to be the cause of death in guinea 

 pigs, and the action of ether could hardly be utilized, therefore, to 

 argue in favor of a central localization of the anaphylactic process. 



That phase of the two theories so far mentioned, therefore, which 

 depends upon the assumption of two separate substances in the orig- 

 inal antigen does not seem established nor even sufficiently likely 

 to warrant the formulation of a theory upon it. 



The second premise is the necessary participation of the body 

 cell, in that the reaction cannot take place unless the cells are ren- 

 dered vulnerable by preliminary alteration. In Gay and Southard's 

 theory this is assumed to occur by irritation exerted by the "anaphy- 

 lactin," in Besredka's scheme it is attributed to the antisensibilisin 

 which is attached to the nerve cells. 



It is plain, therefore, that both Gay and Southard and Besredka 

 admit a preliminary preparation of the cells of the body, and this is, 

 as we shall see, an important factor in anaphvlaxis, though not 

 exactly in the sense of any of the observers named. 



All other views of the mechanism of anaphylaxis have held from 

 the beginning that, in substance, this reaction is a true antigen- 

 antibody reaction. The injected antigen gives rise to a specific 

 antibody. This, on second injection, unites with the first antigen 

 and the result is anaphylactic shock. Such a point of view was held 

 by v. Pirquet, Rosenau and Anderson, and others, who reached this 

 conclusion from the nature of the anaphylactic antigens, the speci- 



12 Wells. JQUV Inf. Dis., Vol. 6, p. 521, 1909. 



