SPAHLINGER CURE

Southland Times, Issue 20618, 17 October 1928, Page 5

SPAHLINGER CURE

TUBERCULOSIS SERUM EFFICACY OF TREATMENT ATTACKED DEBATE AT GENEVA (United Press Assn.—By Telegraph—Copyright.) Geneva, October 15. A strong attack on Dr. Spahlinger was made in the course of a debate by the Grand Council which ultimately extended authorization to Dr. Spahlinger to produce medical sera. State Councillor Jaquet declared that Dr. Ppahlinger refused information regarding the remuneration received from English patients, but it w’as known to range from £lOO to several thousands. He asserted that Dr. Spahlinger’s scientific attainments were insignificant. Councillor Jaquet read a strong report from Dr. Roch, a prominent Swiss practitioner, setting out that Dr. Spahlinger was never controlled medically. The local Government had the appearance of supporting the enterprise which the world over was reputed to be a huge swindle. “The Pasteur Institute considers he is a charlatan,” he said. “This opinion is shared by Swiss bacteriologists despite the fact that the lie has some prominent supporters in England.” Coincident with the debate a pamphlet was widelj- distributed by Dr. Spahlinger entitled: “The Truth About the Spahlinger Affair.”—Australian Press Association. A message from London on May 19, 1927, stated: The Medical Committee attached to the King Edward VII Welsh National Memorial has been to Geneva investigating the Spahlinger treatment. Their conclusions as to the results of the cases examined are on the whole disappointing. The remedies do not offer a certain cure for tuberculosis, and there is no conclusive evidence that their use materially altered the course of the disease. While it is evident that Dr. Spahlinger has shown much ability in devising apparatus for special branches of bacteriology, secrecy renders is almost impossible to judge the value of the work. It is claimed that the achievements are far in advance of modern knowledge, but there is no adequate evidence in substantiation of the claims when, owing to technical or financial reasons, all the attempts to obtain supplies of the Spahlinger preparations for test by competent authorities failed. The committee considers that the application of public and other funds towards the Spahlinger Institute cannot be recommended. The publicity campaign on behalf of Spahlinger was to be deplored, as raising false hopes in the minds of sufferers. Since the war £36.000 had been provided from British sources for the Spahlinger Institute. The committee considered the question of patenting remedies and failed to discover any adequate reason why this course should not be adopted. If Dr. Spahlinger persisted in keeping the formulae secret, production must necessarily be limited as small amounts only could be produced by Dr. Spahlinger assisted by a few personally trained assistants. Under these circumstances there was no hope of giving the remedy to the world.