The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1903-12-04
MAKE BABIES IMMUNE


Methods of using the serum for the re-
lief of suffering humanity. His theories
are diamenuicaily opposed to those Of
Prof. Koch, Of Berlin, whose pupil he
formerly was.
Prof. Won Behring believes that the
germs of tuberculosis are taken into the
system in infancy through the porous
mucous membrane of the intestines; that
consumption is essentially the same in
cattle as in mankind. and that the dis
case appears in individuals who have
carried The germs in their systems for
years and is developed as a result OF
some unusual strain or exposure. He
says that censumptives should be segre-
gated as consrmptives were in the mid
de ages
Prof. Won Behring has become the
medical celebrity Of the hour. Every
physician throughout the covilized world
is speaking of the comparatively young
Marbougr professor. They know his
name for years as the brilliant investi-
gator who discovered the diptheria serum.
but nov they know him as the man VINO
IN all probability VIII reyolutionize the
treatment Of consumption which has held
the field for the past twenty years.
Won Behring's new theories bring him
into direct conflict with the school in
which he himself was reared He is a
scholar OF Koch. an Independent scholar,
ard he employs. like his master. exclu-
sively experimental methods. But his
doctrines set him OF the other extreme
from Koch 1t is necessary here TO
sketch koch's theories in order that the
new doctrine may be better understood.
According TO Koch the origin and cause
of tuberculosis is the bascillus which
hew as the first to discover. The most
prevalent of this illness III men is tuber
culosis of the lungs or consumption. The
disease is caused by the breathing in
directly on the lungs of the tuberculosis
bacillus. For this reason, therefore, the
chief source of the disease is the ex-
pectorations or other overthrow as the
Germans call it, of diseased persons.
tuberculosis in men and cattle is not
identical. The bacillus Of cattle tuber-
culosis does not infect men, and the re-
Ception of baciIlus-infected milk into the
bowels of men is not dangerous for men.
Koch maintstns that the disease can be
combated by combating the poisonous
virus. His reneG.es, therefore. are iso-
lation of the pationt and the destruction
of the overthrow" No measures are
Gecessary, therefore, against bacillus
obtaining foods In Berlin and in Lon
Sen Koch defended this theory In a
Word, he mde consumption an infectious
/ disease, and only the diseased person
Fas to be considered.
These views Of Koch, here roughly
skerch were hotly contested in several
liquarters and the opposition to them grew
I'm force ond cogency, and when Behring
came forward with the doctrine Koch's
star rapidly sank Behring casts on one
side every doctrine identical with Koch's
name. He maintains that Koch is wrong,
root and branch. ard places himself be-
eide those older investigators who COM
Dated Kochs ccntagion theories, and
goes even further than they did. Ben
ring admits that the tuberculosis bacil-
ius is the origin of the disease. but its
Entrance into the human organism need
pot be necessarily followed By the ma
Iority Of cases the bacillus is Intellectual
Ind not in any sense dangerous. Every
nan, woman and child IS in danger of re-
,eiving these bacilli. but the danger is
remote that this bacillus in itself will
produce disease Disease can only follow
when there is Teceptvity or disposition to
nourish the bacillus. According to Beh-
ring the source of the mischief lies
the milk used by babies In his printed
lecture he puts this statement in italics.
The danger of infection, he maintains.
lies in this milk, whether it is the milk
<ef the mother or the milk of an animal.
SThe bacillus is received into The ordinary
food channels. and from these it makes
its way into the tissues and the other
organs. especially into the lungs.
With regard TO the combating of the
disease Behring is equally at complete
variance with Koch His method OF
fighting diptheria illustrates his method
with regard to consumption. Behring
says that the diptheria bacillus is so
general. so Widespread that there IS
practically no escaping it, but disease on
ly ensues where there is receptivity or
individual predisposition TO nourish the
bacillus. The attempt. ;herefore.to de-
stroy the bacillus by isolation. disinfec
ton or other similar means is hopeless
and superfluous labor.
Behring will not Join the army OF bacil-
lus hunters His method consists rather in
the immunizinS OF the threatened per-
con and in the treatment of the patient
with the assistance Of his serum. And so
with tuberculosis. The destruction Of the
bacillus is lost labor, and the isolation
methods used for patients in thickty peo-
pied districts or towns are useless. He
even goes So far as to say that The con-
Will a =
better methods have been adopted. lie
has succeeded, just as Nenner succeeded
witlr>his smallpox investigat ons. in max
Ing cattle immune against eXpel mental
aud accideltal infection from tuberculo-
sis. The adoption OF these methods in
the case OF babies. is perhaps not pcssi-
BILE owing to the possible danger. hut
h. believes that the time is approaching
when we will be able 10 nou.fsh those
babies by milk from iInmunized cattle,
n TO feed them with 4 suitable tuher-
Eulosis poison which will be as effective
as direct innoculation. This is startling
doctrine and ii is quite impossible 10
reconcile il with Kochs theories. He
sonbats the entire theory Of ccntaSion
and lays special emphasis ca p-edisposi-
ion. or on outside influences. he IN
sanitary dwellings. other diseases. inslf-
iciont nutriment. undue labor etc lie
viii not remove the bacillus, he ~iu re
move that which makes the bacillus ac-
i've
Koch is probably the greatest observer
That ever lived. the most patient. me-
thoGic, honest observer: but when he
romes TO sum up his observations he is
a doctrinaire and in love vi II a theory.