Spahlinger's Secret.

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 18899, 14 January 1927, Page 8

Spahlinger's Secret.

It is unfortunate that the renewed discufcsi6n of M. Henri Spahlingef's methods of treating tuberculosis, about which there kava been several cables

during the past few days, is not likely to do much good. The Daily Express rather peremptorily suggests that, if Spahlinger's researches really have led him to the conquest of the disease, or nearer to it than anyone else has yet come, it is his " duty " and privilege " to give the world the heneiit of his knowledge. Since Spahlinger has himself treated as many patients as his resources have allowed him to, the Express presumably means that he should take the medical profession into full partnership, with perfeet freedom to investigate, test, and use his laboratory processes and curative treatment. But behind the Express's definition of Spahlinger's duty and privilege, and behind its enthusiasm for candour, it is easy to Sec suspicion; aiid if Spahlinger, at this date, resents suspicion, it is ns difficult to blame him—unless he is the world's most successful humbug—as it is to say precisely what is suspected, and why. It must at least be said for him that his work has until recently been carried on at his own expense, to the limit of his means, and without profit; that he ha.s declined commercial offers which the ordinary quack would have snapped up; that he has claimed no more than the preliminary or partial success of Ins researches, and has askqd only ior enough help to enable him to continue them. There is some evidence ako that his preliminary successes have been real. A committee of medical members of the House of Commons made a careful investigation and was convinced of the value of his work in general; a committee of Manchester medical men was also satisfied; individual and highly qualified investigators have gone to Geneva sceptical and returned enthusiastic. It is very difficult, on such evidence, to doubt Spahlinger's honesty: and yet it is even more difficult to believe that he has been wholly frank. Although ithas often happened before that a great man has stood perversely in his own light, there seems to be something more than personal perversity robbing Spahlinger of acceptance by the world, and if that something is not personal doubt and fear, no wholly confluent man has ever acted so strangely.