16,1 Haughwout and Horrilleno: Intestinal Parasites 47 
Twelve cases of Ascaris infection in which the patients gave no history 
of abdominal disturbances: 
Unaccompanied by other helminths, 2. 
Accompanied by Trichuris, 8. 
Accompanied by Trichuris and hookworm, 2. 
These five cases of Ascaris infection gave a history of tympanitis 
and distention: 
Unaccompanied by other helminths, 3. 
Accompanied by Trichuris, 2. 
Abdominal pain was a prominent feature of the following twenty-five 
cases of Ascaris infection: 
Unaccompanied by other helminths, 3. 
Accompanied by Trichuris, 21. 
Accompanied by Trichuris and hookworm, 1. 
Abdominal discomfort or pain accompanied by the vomiting of Ascaris 
occurred in these eight cases: 
Accompanied by Trichuris, 7. 
Accompanied by Trichuris and hookworm, 1. 
Abdominal discomfort or pain accompanied by the passage of Ascaris 
occurred in these thirteen cases: 
Unaccompanied by other helminths, 1. 
Accompanied by Trichuris, 8. 
Accompanied by Trichuris and hookworm, 4. 
In only one case in the last two groups did Ascaris, occur to 
the exclusion of other helminths. Contrast these with cases 43 
and 99. In other words, with an increase in the severity of 
the abdominal symptoms there seems to be a tendency toward 
a falling off of solitary infections with Ascaris. With this ap- 
pears a corresponding rise of the association with Trichuris to 
the extent that one strongly suspects that the combination of 
pronounced abdominal symptoms and the spontaneous expulsion 
of Ascaris is frequently the expression of a coexisting infection 
with Trichuris and possibly attributable to it. 
A clinical diagnosis of ascariasis was made by the admit- 
ting physician in several of our patients before the stools were 
examined. It is interesting to note that every one of these 
cases, twelve in number, was positive for Trichuris as well as 
Ascaris. These cases were numbered 6, 9, 15, 18, 20, 29, 39, 
48, 60, 69, 72, and 81. Case 29 passed Ascaris in the stool be- 
fore admission to the hospital, and its fseces were negative for 
the ova Vv^hen examined by us. 
Such data are, of course, only suggestive, but the cases are 
those that seemed to show symptoms sufficiently characteristic 
to justify the admitting physician in making a diagnosis of as- 
cariasis without waiting for the laboratory report. In some 
cases there was a history of the passage or vomiting of worms 
