58 



"unnecessary to collect, at the present moment, all the scraps of 

 information previously published which appear to indicate that 

 most of the common intestinal protozoa of man are indigenous in 

 Europe generally. But the large number of native British infec- 

 tions with E. histolytica revealed in the present Reports must be 

 considered in relation to the incidence of infection with this 

 parasite in the world at large — else we may form a very erroneous 

 •opinion of its significance. The other intestinal protozoa found 

 in Britain should also, of course, be considered in a similar 

 manner : but as U. histolytica is, for practical reasons, more impor- 

 tant, and as information about the others is even more scanty, 

 J shall here leave them out of account. 



The notes which follow are merely .notes, and make no 

 pretensions to being an exhaustive survey of the literature. 



The Occurrence of E. histolytica in France. — There is now 

 evidence to prove that JE. histolytica occurs indigenously in the 

 population of France. The evidence is chiefly derived from 

 records of sporadic cases of amoebic dysentery and liver abscess 

 in persons who have never left Prance. 



Galliard and Brumpt (1912) have published the results of 

 ■a, careful study of an indigenous case of amoebic dysentery. 

 Their patient was a young male Parisian, aged 25, suffering 

 from acute dysentery and passing numerous amoebae iii his 

 stools. The observations and experiments of these workers 

 show conclusively that the amoeba found was E. histolytica. In 

 a brief survey of the literature, the authors were able to find five 

 ■earlier recorded cases which, in their opinion, are to be interpreted 

 as indigenous French cases of disease due to E. histolytica (by 

 these authors called 'Amoeba dysenteriae '). 



In the following year Paviot and Garin (1913) reported 

 another indigenous case of amoebic dysentery observed at Lyons. 

 The amoebae found in their patient — who died of the disease — 

 appear to have been undoubtedly E. histolytica. (I assume that 

 some of the authors' observations were inexact.) These authors 

 also refer to a number of apparently similar previous cases. 



A little later Landouzy and Debr^ (1914) described an indi- 

 genous fatal case of amoebic abscess of the liver, following 

 ■dysentery. The patient was a bargee who had never left France.. 

 The clinical and post-mortem findings leave no doubt that this 

 also was a case of E. histolytica infection. In a useful table the 

 authors summarize previously published observations on 13 

 -apparently similar indigenous cases of E. histolytica infection 

 recorded in France. They also add a warning of the danger 

 which may threaten the community as a result of the importation 

 •of large bodies of colonial troops, infected with the parasite, into 

 France during the War. 



Some interesting observations were recorded two years later 

 by Ravaut and Krolunitski (1916). They stated — but without 

 .giving details — that since the outbreak of the "War they had 

 ibund 25 cases of E. histolytica infection ' of indisputably indi- 



