Filaria loa 9 



a Loa from other parts of the body than the eye have been re- 

 ceived with some caution by hehiiinthologists. This is clearly 

 shown by the silence of Manson, Blanchard, and other authori- 

 ties on this point, even though they cite in connection with some 

 cases in the eye the popular opinion that such worms occur else- 

 where in the body. In the present case we have the best of evi- 

 dence, since the specimens in question were removed by a medical 

 man, and on account of the importance of the matter I have 

 subjected them to most careful scrutiny. While one is not in 

 sufficiently good condition to render an absolute decision possible, 

 there can be no doubt as to the systematic position of the other 

 specimen. Accordingly, it may now be affirmed that the F. loa 

 does make its appearance near the surface in other parts of the 

 body than the eye. Since Dr. Vail has in preparation a paper 

 to be read before the American Academy of Ophthalmology and 

 Oto-laryngology at Buffalo in September, 1905, I forbear to 

 trench further upon his field and refer to his paper for further 

 details regarding these cases and for a discussion of the clinical 

 factors. 



2. Cases of Filaria loa on Record 



Many authors have assembled the earlier records of this par- 

 asite, but in general the lists given have been inaccurate and 

 imperfect. The series given by Blanchard (1899) ^^ admirable 

 in manner of treatment and is the most complete. It includes 

 twenty-five previous cases and one new one. The method em- 

 ployed of listing all records quoted from a given paper as one 

 case under the name of the author seems to me undesirable since 

 it does not distinguish between the account of a single chance 

 specimen and more extended observation. Here each case in- 

 cludes the history of only a single host, sO' far as this could be 

 fixed, even though two or more parasites were removed from 

 the one individual. If this method be criticised as incomplete, 

 one can only reply that it is impossible to determine whether the 

 multiple infection took place at a single time or through repeated 

 introduction of the parasite. Only the positive demonstration of 

 the latter condition would justify the interpretation of the nu- 



279 



