The Waterbury Democrat., 1937-06-16
IMMUNITY VERSUS RESISTANCE

I can't for the life of me sec, writes man who has had tubercu- losis for ten years, why you are 50 rabid against the word resistance"
 The correspondent then quotes from a textbook of pathology for nurses and from another textbook of anatomy and physiology, to show that medical authors confuse "in- munity" with resistance" or use the terms loosely and interchange ably. Further he cites the definition, of the word immunity" given in. Webster - freedom or exemption from any charge, duty, obligation etc. This would suggest, the cor- respondent maintains, merely . passive state; whereas resistance conveys the idea of active opposi- ton. Moreover, in ail his experience with physicians in tuberculosis hospitals and in private practice, no one has ever seemed to make any such to-do over the precise use of the words as I do. Correspondent enjoys this column and profits by 1t, but wishes he could see ths light, if there is any that will clearly dis tinguish resistance from immunity.
 Now, listen. It matters little which term you apply, only 50 you know what you mean. Many casual or thoughtless readers have ac- cused me of similar finicking in my effort to make people cri.ccnscious and persuade them to live by the golden rule of hygiene. The authori- ties cited by the correspondent and plenty of greater authorities, have messed up the significance of the terms immunity and resistance 50 much that 1t H diiiicult to clarify the matter now. I have walked many times around my desk and rolled several somersaults ponder ing how to go about 1t. An, let's see what Stedman's Medical Dic- tionary has to say about 1t: Ini- munlty (L.immunitas). A state, natural or acquired, in which the body is resistant to disease. This definition will please the tubercu- lous correspondent. But now let us turn to Resistance. A passive force exerted in opposition to another and active force. Nothing about ac- tive opposition to disease here. Not that we need take the diction- ary too seriously. Etymologists are not infallible.
 My objection to the use of the term resistance" if you mean im- munity or if you don't know what you mean or what you are talking about is merely that 1t is 50 mis- leading and confusing and flinders the spread of knowledge. l have the same objection to the use of the term "cold" or "the common cold" if you mean bronchitis. measles, irl- fIuenza, infantile paralysis. pneu- monia or what not or if you don't know what you mean or what you are talking about.
 Nobody can say in any instance whether 6 person has any resist ancc" against a particular disease or against various or all diseases. But Q physician can determine in any instance whether 8 person has any immunity against diphtheria. Six weeks hence I shall have 6 reasonable degree of immunity against Typhoid and paratyphoid fever, because I have received the first of three doses of the vaccine" or bacterin. No one would speak of anti typhoid inoculation as "in- crossing resistance": it is specii- caily administered to stimulate de- velopmsnt of immunity.
 Potts Disease
 What is Potts disease? Is 1t cur- able? fJ.F.)
 -TuherculoHiG of spine. If