Isolation. 7A 



(6) Isolation. 



When a herd is infected, the arrest of the disease can- 

 not be hoped for unless the sick are removed from the 

 healthy. The constant breathing of the infected air is 

 likely to be much more deleterious than the preventive 

 medication will be beneficial. On the other hand, the 

 prompt removal of the sick on the first appearrnce of 

 illness will often succeed in checking the disease, irre- 

 spective of any other measure. 



(c) Inoculation. 



Under this heading must be considered : 1st. What 

 inoculation is. 2d. Does successful inoculation prove vi- 

 carious of the plague ? 3d. If vicarious, when is it ap- 

 plicable? 4;th. In what conditions is it to be condemned? 



Ikoculation : Its Authok, Mode, Etc. 



In December, 1850, Louis Willems, M. D., of Hassalt, 

 Belgium, son of a large distiller, began his essays on in- 

 oculation. To determine the susceptibility of difl^erent 

 animals, he inoculated with the exudation matter from 

 diseased lungs 6 rabbits, 23 pea-fowls, a number of chick- 

 ens, 4 dogs, 3 sheep, 7 hogs and 2 goats, but in all the 

 wounds healed without any unhealthy action. These 

 animals were accordingly set down as insusceptible. Ac- 

 cidental wounds of human beings were equally harmless. 

 He instituted experiments on several cattle which he in- 

 oculated with the liquids from healthy lungs. The result 

 was only slight inflammation followed by healing. 



He inoculated three cattle, respectively, with blood, 

 buccal mucus and intestinal tubercle taken from sick 

 cows. These produced but slight inflammation, followed 

 by prompt recovery. 



He inoculated 108 cattle with the pulmonary exudation 

 of diseased lungs. In a period averaging fifteeen days 

 after inoculation a swelling occurred in most of these in 

 the seat of inoculation, and though afterwards kept iu a i 



