xiii
One of Dr. Bamber's experiments, I think, should be mentioned, as it shows
that this vaccine is as good as the Mysore lanoline lymph which is supposed to be the best
in India.
On December 4th 8 children were vaccinated on each arm in three places. The
upper insertion was made with Dr. Bamber's vaseline lymph prepared on November 21st
(13 days previously), the next place was inoculated with lanoline lymph paste prepared
by Dr. Bamber also on November 21st (13 days old) from the same buffalo calves which
gave lymph for the vaseline lymph. The third place on each arm was vaccinated with Mysore
lanoline lymph prepared on November 26th (8 days old). 1 inspected 7 of these children
(the other child did not come up for inspection), and found that all the vaseline lymph
vaccinations had taken well, and 14 vesicles had been produced. Eleven of the lanoline
lymph paste made by Dr. Bamber had taken, while 3. places had failed, and only 9 of
the Mysore lanoline lymph vaccinations had " taken " and 5 failed.
To make more sure of this I repeated the experiment at Amritsar. The only
difference being that I used Calcutta lanoline lymph instead of lanoline lymph made by
Dr. Bamber.
On February 24th, 7 children were vaccinated in three places on each arm. The
highest place was vaccinated with Dr. Bamber's vaseline lymph, dated 15th January 1896
(i.e., 40 days old). The middle insertion was made with Mysore lanoline lymph, dated 6th
February 1896 (18 days old), and the lowest with Calcutta "lanoline vaccine paste"
dated 21st February 1896 (3 days old). The vaseline and the Calcutta lymph each gave
9 vesicles and the Mysore lymph 8 vesicles.
On the same date a buffalo calf was vaccinated with the same three supplies of lymph.
On the right side five scratches were made and Calcutta lymph inserted. This " took" well.
On the left side five similar scratches were made and vaseline lymph inserted. This took in
every place. On the inner side of both the thighs and on the permium and scrotum scratches
were made (5 in all) and Mysore lymph inserted. This failed in every case.,
It will be noticed that the vaseline lymph, after being kept 40 days, acted as well
as Calcutta lanoline lymph which had just been received and was only. 3 days old, and
better than Mysore lanoline lymph which was 8 days old.
From what I have seen I have come to the conclusion that vaseline lymph has the
following advantages over fresh lymph:—
(1). It can be easily carried about in the pocket or sent by post. This does
away with the necessity of carrying a child or buffalo calf as a vaccinfer
to the place where vaccinations are going to be performed.
(2). Fresh lymph can only be used on the day the vesicles are ripening, and all
lymph not used on that day is wasted, vaseline lymph keeps good for
several months and can be used whenever required.
(3). Vaseline lymph, being diluted with five times its weight of vaseline, five
times as many people can be vaccinated from the same calf as would other-
wise supply the fresh lymph.
(4). If the vaseline lymph be all manufactured at a central depôt the Vaccinators
would be saved all the trouble and time wasted in procuring and vaccinat-
ing a buffalo calf at every village or town in which they work. The
Special Staff Vaccinator using buffalo calves can usually only vaccinate
about 500 people a month. Dr. Bamber's Vaccinators using vaseline
lymph were able to vaccinate 2,000 people a month. This shows the
saving of time which the new lymph ensures.
I think it superior to lymph stored in capillary tubes because—
(1). It is more certain in its results,* and keeps longer.
(2). Much larger quantities can be sent out for immediate use.
(3). Capillary tubes are very fragile, and are much more readily broken in
transit, especially if sent by post.
(4). Pure lymph often coagulates in the tubes, vaseline lymph never does.
Vaseline lymph seems to me better than lanoline lymph because—
(1). It is of more fluid consistence, and less tenacious than lanoline, and there-
fore is much easier to work with.
(2). It is a mineral substance, and not an animal product as lanoline, and is
therefore much more acceptable to Hindús.
(3). Being clear it is easy to see whether it has been properly mixed with
vesicles or not. Lanoline is opaque, and it is impossible to determine
whether it contains vesicle, &c., or not. This is an important matter if the
preparation is left to natives.
(4). Moulds, &c., will not grow on vaseline, but they do so on lanoline.
(5). So far we have found that vaseline gives better results than lanoline.
* See paragraph 3 of this Report.