CONSUMPTION

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1831, 10 April 1907, Page 53

CONSUMPTION

TRANSMISSIBLE FROM THE COW, TO MAN. TViTTJC HANGERS. IMPORTANT REPORT BY EXPERTS.

The long-debated question as to whether tuberculosis is or is not trans-missible-from the animal to the human Being is answered emphatically in the affirmative, so far as the bovine animal is concerned, in the second interim report of the Royal Commission on Human and Animal Tuberculosis •issued recently. Thus Dr Koch's wellknown theory is directly, challenged. The following are the conclusions arrived at, from which it will be seen that the Commissioners axe equally emphatic in urging that the utmost care should be exercised.in regard to the supply of milk:— “There can be no doubt but ■ that in a certain number of cases the tuberculosis occurring iu the human subject, especially in children, is tho direct result of the . introdviction into the human body, of the bacillus of bovine tuberculosis; and there also can be no doubt that in the majority at least of these cases the bacillus is introduced through cows’ milk. Cows’ milk containing bovine tubercle bacilli is clearly a cause of tuberculosis and of fatal tuberculosis in man.

, “Of the sixty cases of human tuberculosis investigated by us, fourteen of the viruses belonged to Group I.; that is to say, contained the bovine bacillus. If. instead of taking all these sixty cases, wo confine ourselves to cases of tuberculosis in which the bacilli were apparently introduced into the body by way of the alimentary canal, the proportion of Group I. becomes very much larger. “Of the total sixty cases investigated by us, twenty-eight possessed clinical histories indicating that in them the bacillus was introduced through the alimentary canal. Cf these thirteen’ belong to Group I. Of, the nine cases in which cervical glands were studied by us, three, and of the nineteen cases in which the lesions of abdominal tuberculosis were studied by us, ten, belong to Group I. “These facts indicate that a very large proportion of tuberculosis contracted by ingestion is due to tubercle bacilli of bovine source. “A very considerable amount of disease and loss of life, especially among the young, must bo attributed to the consumption of cows’ milk containing ifcrfblercle bacilli. The presence of tubercle bacilli in cows’ milk can be detected, though with some difficulty, if the proper means be adopted, and. such milk ought never to be use-d as food. “There is . far dess difficulty in recognising clinically that a cow is distinctly suffering from tuberculosis, in which case she may be yielding tuberculous milk. The milk coming from such, a cow ought not to form, part of human food, and, indeed, ought not to be used as food at all. “Our results clearly point to the necessity of measures more stringent than those at prukuit enforced being taken to prevent the sale or the consumption of such milk.” These conclusions, as already stated, are in distinct conflict with the theory propounded by Dr Koch, who in a paper read before the British Congress on Tuberculosis in London on July 23, 1901, re-affirmed his belief that the disease was not transmissible from animals to man. In fact the Royal Commission was to all intents and purposes called into existence by that, pronouncement, for it was appointed on August 31st in the same year.

The Commissioners selected were Sir Michael Foster, F.R.S. (whose death was announced recently), Professor Sims Wcodhead (Cambridge), Professor Sidney Martin, F.R.S. (University College, London), Professor McFadyan {Principal Royal Veterinary College), and Professor Boyce (University College, Liverpool). In the first interim report issued by the Ckmimissioners, it was stated that when the bovine animal was inoculated by material of human origin the -disease was set up, and further that the character of the disease in the bovine animal and the human species could not be distinguished. The further conclusions now reached with their warning in regard to milk are also only an instalment. The Commissioners state that they have limited their inquiry so far to the identity of human and bovine 'tuberculosis/ but that the results so far arrived at point very strongly to the necessity of extending their studies further. They have already don© so to some extent, the report, indeed, being sprinkled with references to experiments on a variety of animals, including guinea-pigs, rabbits, dags, cats, goats, rats, monkeys, and anthropoid apes. Special attention has been directed to the tuberculosis so common in pigs, and the Commissioners will report further on this and on other matters.

Not the least interesting portion of the report is a brief critical and historical sketch of the Avhole question of consumption research. Hex© unstinting tribute is paid to Dr Koch for his remarkable discovery of Hie “bacillus tuberculosis.” At the same time, what are iioav considered the mistakes of that scientist are dul~ recorded.

There is the important question of the use of tuberculin. “’Koch,” says the .report, “was first led to believe that the aetion of tuberculin—that is to say, of some or other of the products contained in the mixture called tuberculin —was antagonistic to the pathogenic activity of the bacillus; that if introduced into a body suffering from tuberculosis it would arrest, or even cure, the disease. In this he was proved to he mistaken.” In the main body of the report there is the interesting statement that the reaction, set up in bovine and other animals by tuberculin obtained from a human source is the same as that caused by tuberculin prepared from the bovine source. It was in 1900 that Dr Koch first brought forward the theory that bovine and human tuberculosis were quite distinct. The Commissioners carried on their long and arduous investigations mainly at Blythwcod and Walpole farms, and at a detached house at Boyaleot, in Essex. All these were placed at their disposal by Sir James Blyth, whose generosity is fittingly acknowledged.