Abstract
It has been shown in previous communications that the serological evidence is not in harmony with the current view that anaphylaxis is due to a reaction between the antibody present in the blood and the introduced antigen. This contention has now been confirmed with the help of the graphic method introduced by Dale, by means of the following experiment. A guinea-pig which is passively sensitized by the injection of 0.3 cubic centimeters of the serum of a rabbit immunized against horse serum, may be killed on the following day by an intravenous injection of horse serum. The uterine preparation also, on the second day, responds typically to the administration of horse serum. If, however, the antigen is applied immediately after sensitization, no reaction occurs, either in vivo or in vitro. The same failure to react follows the injection of relatively enormous amounts of the immune rabbit's serum, as for example three cubic centimeters. Hence, it is apparent that the presence of immune bodies in the circulating blood does not suffice to make a guinea-pig hypersensitive, but that these antibodies must first be bound by the body cells.
In the present paper I shall, furthermore, make a preliminary report upon a new method of studying the mechanism of anaphylaxis and immunity. Hitherto it has been customary to study these phenomena by means of the reaction to antigen, induced through the presence of antibody in the organism. The object sought by the method herein described is to permit of the identification of the antigen, as well as of the antibody, in the sensitized or immunized animal.
The essential feature of this method consists in the use of an immune serum as antigen. To illustrate: if a guinea-pig be sensitized by means of large doses of the serum of a rabbit immunized against horse serum, it has been shown that the passive sensitization to horse serum persists over a period of two weeks.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.