THEORIES OF MECHANISM OF REACTION 93 



it is important to bear in mind that the stimulus itself is not a 

 specific factor, but that the hematopoietic system has been attuned 

 to respond to a nonspecific stimulus with the production of a spe- 

 cific substance. Larson raises a question in this connection that 

 has occurred to many in the treatment of pneumonia (especially of 

 type I) where some observers claim to have obtained results with 

 normal horse serum equal to those attained with the specific serum. 

 That is, are we dealing with the actual amelioration of symptoms be- 

 cause of the antibodies contained in and injected with the horse serum, 

 or with a nonspecific reaction in which the antibodies that bring about 

 the cure of the patient are derived from the patient under the stimulus 

 of the injection? The fact that Type I serum does not particularly 

 influence Type II pneumonia would speak against the supposition 

 raised by Larson. 



As a matter of fact this alteration of the antibody content after 

 the injection of foreign proteins is by no means a constant affair in 

 clinical studies and cannot be considered the sole basis of the thera- 

 peutic result. Thus v. Groer found no increase in antibodies after 

 the injections, while Rohonyi found not only that the antibodies, in- 

 cluding the agglutinin titer, the bactericidal titer and the opsonic 

 index, were not altered but were at times actually decreased after 

 the therapeutic injection and this despite the fact that the patient 

 was clinically cured. Rohonyi made the further interesting observa- 

 tion that in some of these afebrile typhoids a positive blood culture 

 was at times obtained several days after the injection and after 

 the subsidence of the clinical symptoms. This finding has not been 

 confirmed. (Decastello.) 



Wright's Theory Wright believes that the old conception that vaccines 

 are contraindicated in acute infections because it would be like adding 

 poison to a poisoned system does not apply in infections because immune 

 responses are primarily developed in the infected area and as long as some 

 portions of the body remain which are not involved, these uninvolved por- 

 tions may be activated by vaccine inoculations for antibody formation to 

 aid the involved portions as a reserve force in overcoming the infection, 

 and that, contrary to previous conceptions, it is found that antibodies are 

 rapidly formed when vaccines are injected into healthy tissues. In this 

 connection he calls attention to the great benefit that was obtained from 

 vaccine inoculations especially in "Poisoned wounds" with streptococcus 

 cellulitis, lymphangitis, erysipelas, etc., and states that the most striking 

 results are obtained when vaccines are employed early in acute cases. 



As a means of more clearly expressing immunizing processes, he pro- 

 poses a series of new terms. Terminology, as now applied in immunology, 

 has a pronounced tendency to confuse the average reader. It is difficult 

 for him to keep the importance of such words like antigen, amboceptor, 

 agglutinins, precipitins, lysins, opsonins, etc., in their proper relations to 

 immunizing processes without a consequent confusion of ideas. He has 

 attempted to clear up this matter by pointing out that in infectious proc- 



