Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-45l2p Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T05:51:12.809Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Studies on the Effects of Tuberculin

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

Peter M. Holst
Peter M. Holst
Affiliation:
From the Hygienic Institute of the University of Christiania.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In order to obtain knowledge of the fate of tuberculin in the organism the substance was injected into normal animals. After injection, tuberculin rapidly disappears from the vascular system and does not reappear in the urine till after several hours. In the meantime the substance is bound in the organism, probably in the bones and in the liver. Living cells in vitro also have the faculty of binding tuberculin.

Through numerous experiments a difference is demonstrated between the complements of different sera, a fact which strongly supports the theory of the plurality of complements. Evidence is brought forth which points to a difference between tuberculous and non-tuberculous complement.

Tuberculin is highly noxious to the vitality of the white blood corpuscles, and more toxic to corpuscles from tuberculouos organisms than from not-tuberculous organisms. A certain protective power in regard to the toxic action of tuberculin is found in the serum. This power is greater in serum from normal organisms, than in serum from tuberculous organisms.

By means of vital staning a difference is demonstrated between the effects of tuberculin upon the leycocytes from normal and tuberculous animals.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 20 , Issue 4 , December 1921 , pp. 342 - 359
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1921

References

REFERENCES

Achard, et Bènard (1909). Compt. Rend. Soc. Biol. LXVII. p. 502.Google Scholar
Arnoldi, W. and Leschke, E. (1920) Deutsche med. Wochenschr. No. 37.Google Scholar
Behring, (1912). Cited in Dieudonn´'s Schutzinpfung and Serumtherapie, 2nd ed.Google Scholar
Besredka, Kraus and Levaditi, (1911). Handbuch der Technik and Methodik der tätsforschung. Ergänzungsband. (Jena.)Google Scholar
Bordet, J. (1896). Ann. Inst. Pasteur, X. p. 110.Google Scholar
Bordet, J. (1920). Traité de l'immunité, p. 447. (Paris.)Google Scholar
Ehrlich, P. (1900). Berlin. Klin. Wochenschr. No. 31.Google Scholar
Franceschelli, (1913). Zeitschr. f. Immunitälsforch. Orig. XX.Google Scholar
Fridemann, (1910). Zeitschr. f. Hyg. LXVII. p. 279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedberger, (1917). In Kraus and Brugsch's Spezielle Pathologie and Therapie innerer Krankheiten, II.Google Scholar
Gengou, (1898). Ann. Inst. Pasteur, XII. p. 465.Google Scholar
Guillain, et Laroche (1910). Compt. Rend. Soc. Biol. LXXVIII. p. 220.Google Scholar
Koch, R. (1912). Gesammelte. Werke, I (Leipzig.)Google Scholar
Löwenstein, (1908). In Kraus-Levaditi's Handb.d. Tech. u. Method. d. Immitätsforsch. p. 826.Google Scholar
Löwenstein, (1908). In Kolle-Wassermann's Handb. d. pathog. Mikroorg.2nd ed. v. p. 608.Google Scholar
Marie, et Tiffman (1900). Compt. Rend. Soc. Biol. LXIV.Google Scholar
Moro, E. (1907). München med. Wochenschr. Nos.21, 31.Google Scholar
Ruppel, and Rickmann, (1910). Zeitschr. f. Immunitätsforsch. VI. p. 34.Google Scholar
Slatinèanou, et Danielopol (1908). Compt. Rend. Soc. Biol. LXIV. p. 420.Google Scholar
Slatinèanou, et Jonesco-Mihaesti (1908). Compt. Rend. Soc. Biol. p. 420.Google Scholar
Vaillard, (1981). Ann. Inst. Pasteur, V. p. 1.Google Scholar
Wolff-Eisner, (1909). Centralbl. f. Bakkteriol. Abt. 1, Referate XXXIV. p. 114.Google Scholar
Wright, Sir A. (1912). Technique of the Teat and Capillary Glass Tube. (London.)Google Scholar
Wright, Sir A. (1915). Proc. Roy. Soc. Med. VIII. p. 41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, Sir A. (I.1918). Lancet, I.Google Scholar