No abstract

I n 1923, Besredka (1-4) stated t h a t he could produce a specific generalized i m m u n i t y in rabbits and guinea pigs to the subcutaneous or intracutaneous injection of staphylococcus and streptococcus b y the injection of specific broth filtrates, or, b y the local application to the skin of specific broth dressings.The immunization was best produced in two ways: (1) by the intracutaneous injections over a small area of either (a) a sterile specific broth filtrate (the organism was grown 10-14 days in broth, filtered and the filtrate reinocnlated with the same organism and grown again for 14 days and again filtered) or (b) of a vaccine made by heating a 24 hour broth culture of the specific organism at 60 ° for 30 minutes; (2) by the application for 24 hours over a limited skin area of compresses moistened by either the sterile specific broth filtrate or the heated killed broth vaccine.The reaction to a subcutaneous injection of 1-2 cc. of a 24 hour broth culture in the control animal was a large sloughing ulcer, whereas in the protected animal, there was only a small localized abscess. Others (5) repeated these experiments with similar results. Gratia (6), however, obtained the same results with broth. By intracutaneous injection, Mallory and Marble (7) produced a local cutaneous immunity to staphylococcus in rabbits with stelile broth as well as with the broth filtrate. Miller (8) protected guinea pigs against staphylococcus with specific broth filtrates, vaccines, horse serum, broth and concentrated meat broth, all of these substances being injected intracutaneously or applied as compresses. The immunity was well localized, spreading but slightly beyond the area treated and in no sense considered specific. Since Besredka's work, clinicians have treated infections of various kinds with specific broth filtrates or vaccines in broth. Citron and Picard (9, 10) review the work done by others and claim to have had good 663 on

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract