OCR Text |
Show VACC IMATION FOB TRE ' INFLUENZA GERM At the request of local physicians, the Standard reproduces the following from "The Journal," of the American Medical Association, on the "Value of Vaccination Against Influenza." We publish in our Correspondence Correspon-dence Department in this issue an Interesting letter with the above title. In it the author apparently takes it for granted that the influenza in-fluenza baccllus is the primary cause of the acute epidemic respiratory respi-ratory infection now pandemic and being generally called influenza. There is no conclusive evidence that the Pfeiffer bacillus plays any greater role, if as great, in the respiratory tract in this disease. This point emerges very clearly in the abstract of recent English and German literature and in the original orig-inal contributions printed In this issue. We would also emphasize that so far as we know the influenza influ-enza bacillus is a very poor antigen; anti-gen; there is, in fact, nothing to show that definite antibodies against this bacillus develop in the course of influenza, and the results re-sults of animal experiment show that it requires prolonged immunization immun-ization before any response becomes be-comes apparent. Again, we have no record of any properly conducted conduct-ed and controlled experiments on human beings with influenza vaccines. vac-cines. No results of careful observations ob-servations are as yet at hand. These things being so, what should a fair-minded and thoughtful thought-ful physician say as to the face value of Influenza vaccine? In this . connection we give two examples of so-called "evidence" that appeared ap-peared in newspapers, which seem to be the medium through which most of the evideuce is appearing. appear-ing. One appeared in the health department, conducted by a physician, phy-sician, of a metropolitan newspaper newspa-per in the middle west under the , utterly misleading heading "Vaccine "Vac-cine Blots Out 'Flu.'" We quote: The ovidenco of the efficiency of the treatment Is this: On October Octo-ber 20, about half the population of a town of 10.000 had been vaccinated vac-cinated at least in part. There have been seven cases of the disease. dis-ease. All the cases were among unvacclnated people. In a nearby town, with '400 inhabitants, there have been 200 cases and fifteen deaths. In the asylum three cases developed. Everybody was vaccinated vac-cinated and the disease did not spread. In St. Mary's Hospital the disease got a foothold among the doctors and nurses. After the vaccination vac-cination the disease stopped at once. The other appears in an eastern paper as an interview with a physician, phy-sician, who, incidentally, is a manufacturer man-ufacturer of vaccines, although this vital fact does not appear in tho item. Again we quote: I think It but just that I should report tho success I have had In treating and preventing Spanish influenza with vaccine. , I have given over 1,000 inoculations with 100 per cent protection and treated treat-ed several hundred cases with no deaths. Prior to the time I used vaccine nearly every one exposed to the disease contracted it. Now I blot it out of every house at my first visit by inoculating the entire en-tire family. This so-called evidence has not yet been submitted in any scientific scien-tific manner with i.he necessary facts and details to permit any judgment whatever to be formed as to its true value. In the meantime, mean-time, we should not forget that in its natural course, epidemic influenza influ-enza Is affecting different, even adjacent, communities with widely wide-ly varying degrees of severity, and that vaccination in nn institution after the disease has appeared can have no value as an experiment because it may have been dono in the wane of the epidemic. Finally we repeat: Vaccination against epidemic influenza is in a wholly experimental stage. Nothing can be learned as to its real value from indiscriminate vaccination of the public. The physician who, in view of the severity of tho epidemic, epi-demic, feels that he is justified in vaccinating his patients, should be fair to them and protect himself him-self by informing the patient that he regards the procedure as wholly whol-ly of an experimental nature. Pending developments, nothing should be done by the medical profession that may arouse unwarranted un-warranted hope among the public pub-lic and be followed by disappointment disappoint-ment and distrust of medical science sci-ence and the medical profession. |