Western Carolina Democrat and French Broad hustler. [volume] (Hendersonville, N.C.) 1913-1915, 1913-05-22
(By w. E. Yelverton.l

: Oh CAd1 recognition by The Navy
department of the Won Rnck vac
cine for the prevention and cure
OF tuberculosis, the result of 20
years of experiment by DIR. Karl
Won Ruck, of Asheville, N. G.
may mean that within a year the
vaccine will be adopted officially
by the department. It certain
will if the tests that are soon to
be begun by the department bear
out the preliminary investigation
made by DIR. L. D. Stitt, one of
the department best men. DIR.
Slit spent a week in Asheville go
ing through the laboratories Of DR.
Won Ruck and the records of his
work on animals and on human
beings. His report to the depart
ment is that all claims made for
the vaccine have been borne out
to a remarkable degree.
DR.. Stitt did not submit a writ
ten report to General G..
f.. Stokes, of the Navy department
but told him that his expectations
were more than met in his invest
igation. The department will in
a few days send a man to Ashe-
vile to stay several months and
observe the work of the vaccine.
In the meantime. DIR. Won Ruck
has supplied the department here
with his vaccine and complete in
structions in it's use.. The depart
ment will make the same expert
ment here with his viccine Won
Ruck has been making in Ashe-
vile. The navy's man in Ashe-
vile and the scientists here will
work together. The tests will
probably last a year.
Different From Friedmann's
The vaccine of DR.. Won Ruck
differs from that prepared and
promoted by DIR. Friedman in
that DR.. friedman uses live tu-
bercle bacilli, while DR.. Won Ruck
uses bacilli that have been killed
by a process taking about a year
to, complete. DR.. friedman pas
ses the live tubercle bacilli throu-
oh a turtle. DR.. Won Ruck kills
the bacilli by grinding and fin
ally filters them throug porcelain
to make sure that there is no life
left in them. DR.. Won Ruck at
tributes the value of his vaccine
to the presence of all the necces-
sary constituents of the tubercle
bacillis obtained under precau-
tions which assure the avoidance
OF their injury or modification.
The vaccine is shown to be
harmless by tests made on guinea
pigs, which are particularly sus-
ceptible to tuberculosis. If these
animals are not infected by the
vaccine, it may be taken as GER
tain that no harm can come to a
human being by its injection. The
injection of the vaccine in guinea
pigs has been shown over, and
over again to make the pigs i'm
mune from tuberculosis. Inject
ions into human beings of tuber-
cular tendencies have been shown
to create immunity. In early stages
Of the disease, injections have eff
fected cures. The vaccine does not
help advanced cases,for the patient
is then too thoroubhfy ~inocculated
with tuberculosis itself to be cap
able of reaction in response to the
vaccine.
Reason Why Unknown.
The reason why the vaccine is of
benefit its inexpIicable to the lay
mind, and is even unknown to the
medical profession. The vaccine
is not an anti-toxin nor is its
work similar to that of small pox
vaccine. Vaccination for small
pox prevention gives the patient
a mild form of the disease. An
titoxin such as is used in the case
of diptheria develops resisting
agencies in the blood which al
successfully cope with the toxins
(poisons) of d~iphtheria. Both
these treatments are understood
generally.
The Won Ruck vanccine injected
into a person who has no tuber-
culosis in his system or who has
never had it produces absolutely
no effect. If the person has the
disease, redness at the point Of IN