The Press Saturday, February 21, 1931. The Spahlinger Experiments.

Press, Volume LXVII, Issue 20168, 21 February 1931, Page 14

The Press Saturday, February 21, 1931. The Spahlinger Experiments.

It is so long since controversy raged round the name of Mr Henry Spahlinger and his anti-tuberculosis serums that many readers must have been surprised when, a few weeks ago, a cable message briefly reported a new and successful experiment. Apart from the bare fact that a committee under the chairmanship, of the Aga Khan had announced the successful testing of a vaccine to render cattle immune from tuberculosis, the message . contained only an uncertain version of the chairman's report—that the treatment gave calves strong resistance against the disease, "eyen after doses which were "sufficient to kill, unvaccinated calves " within a >■ month"; but the uncertainty about these "doses" is cleared : up and much additional'information given, iiv the full English newspaper accounts and comments. Especially in a country which, like New Zealand, maintains huge herds for an export dairy trade, the importance of sure, easy, and cheap immunisation is so great that it is worth while to summarise the evidence for the success of the test. It was carried out on the farm of a well-known breeder of pedigree stock in Norfolk and w ; as designed to check the results of previous tests in Switzerland. Spahlinger's simplified bovine vaccine 'prepared from dead germs was used, in a dosage varying from " a mere trace " to " large "doses,'.' on eighteen calves, which, with others unvaccinated,, were given by injection " massive doses " of living bovine tubercle bacilli from a common container. All the calves, except two of the unvaccinated ones, which received the virus subcutaneouslv, were inoculated in the jugular vein. The date of this operation was July 12th. One ''unvaccinated calf died on August 11th, | another on August 16th. These two | were the " controls," which had been i inoculated in the same way as ' the eighteen vaccinated calves, in the jugular vein; The other two unvaccinated calves, subcutaneously inoculated, died a little later, on September 7th and 10th. One vaccinated calf died; but it had received the smallest dose of vacqine, a mere trace, which, however, gave it " a sufficient degree of * resistance to enable it to survive the " uiwaccinated control calves by three months." Microscopic examination by independent bacteriologists showed thqt the five calves had died of tuberculosis/, The remaining seventeen vaccihated calves were "alive and.in good "-health." This" is of course a summary df vrhat is itself a summary record p£ the test r and both are far from show(pig exclude all dbubhj But neglect is Haye tieen permitted by the j 'jjnjierviHng'committee, who signed the 'xespjcdi or to have escaped their notice. were: Mr Alfred Lewis, chairman bl the Norfolk Union, Mr Henty "Overman, a former chairman and long a member of the Council of the Agricultural Society, Captain G. R. Buxton,' the breeder on whose farm the experiment was conducted, Mr Guy G. j3oobyTM.B.C.V.S., Mr B. W. Blomfleld,; 1&8.C.V.5.,, and -Major-General S|r Frederick Miurjce. / . P® afimsteif for Agriculture, Dr. aaid m the House of Commons s3ft indepefadent' test, to 'fie Qpaned'ool tiy experts in bovine tlifece are doubts, they course; be! settled, one way or /titer The prospective importance great tha,t,while be wise, it is pure folly to l^ye|p^;jiinp&plved ( ; and "Lens," jthe ptpdi©i& the' New sw»/ does not presume too much that "the conquest of " tube&ljijosis in man is implicit in the 4t of the disease in cattle." if'Mr Spahlinger can show ;JairittßrS' hpw to -guard against 'pe&J^sia"' and •'h'eayy losses in the iind meat industries, and if children from being intuberculQus milk, then another .mil "enable him to' liberate the riwft from'tuberculosis as su#ely fast &jmer .liberated it from smallpox, However, that " Lens " ,iyas fs>m a , vehement, o£ Spahli?ge*and now rages against the w various campaigns -'of yiliflcatipri and hearty un* /(s^nplppr} which, begjgar eotoandijiafleC'it impossible to ob.,"t^f^f%'Jiearmg"t the answer,to that Spahfinger himit; very difficult ;to Ijsten to Soublful whether'he was preIsred'tO'Spesk 1 but-in any conditions, gaining. But he ought in; England, strong enough -4 a "hearing in spite of hearty 'liars;, clearly appeared from a recent urging that the time had 'come to give the world the results "of 14s recent demonstrations. It was signed by, the following, with others: 4Cbe' Ags Khan, the Marquia of Crewe, the Bertha Dawkine, Hon. Sir Arthur Stanley (chairman - of' the Brit|sb pross Society), Sii Arthur Shiefe* { for the Colonics) Sir Archibald Weigall (member of the Council of the 'JJoyai Agricultural Society), Sir Lyijden Macassey, Colonel Sir James <Eeynoids,v' MiP„" Major-I&eneijal Sir Frederick* Maurice, Sir Bruce Bruce Porter, Sir Thomas Watts, Dr. J. H. M.P,, W.-Gilbert, president of the' British Friesian Cattle Society, and Lieutenant-Colonel Charles 'Seymour. 1 * 1 ~ 1 1 1 1 /' ■ i

saving permanently. Further, no great difficulty would be met with in persuading the present servants of the public in these various capacities to go on serving a little longer. But the chief cost of most elected bodies comes after election and not before. Almost without exception the result of a popular election is to place enormous sums of money, and vast accumulations of material, in the hands of people whom nobody would even pretend to regard as the most competent in the community to exercise control. The most that can be said is that they may be the most competent of those who have offered their services; and it is not necessary to say how much that means. If we are to save money at "municipal and other public body " elections " —and it is imperative that we should—we must begin a great deal farther back than the hiring of halls, printing of rolls, payment of returning officers, and so on; and until we do it ho true economy will be possible. When the Great War was making us poor we tried occasionally to retrieve the situation by substituting business men in government for politicians. 1 Not many people want to see that experiment tried again, directly or indirectly; nor is it necessary; but it is very necessary that we should try a little harder to get a better resultfrom the present system. It is no use shutting our eyes to the fact that the average capacity of the average elected representative—from Parliament to Road ahd Rabbit Boards —is so low as to make intelligent men shudder when a crisis comes. Unless better men will offer themselves, and better motives guide us when we are choosing, it will be neither here nor there whether we add the cost of new elections or do not. If we had new, all 'over the Dominion, elected bodies of genuinely high' capacity, it would be well worth While asking them to serve a little longer. The process could begin With Parliament, and be carried as far as each district felt inclined to go. But our Parliament is the feeblest assembly Wellington has ever seen, and there are very few local bodies whose capacity rises much higher. In other words, we are not merely muddling along, but taking every imaginable risk of bungling, waste, and inefficiency. Instead of letting matters stand as they are, we must, for economy's sake alone, take the earliest opportunity of putting an end to the present situation, and creating a better one. We can do it only by electing better men.