Dr. C. Creighton, M.D. and vaccination : a review / by J. McVail.

  • McVail, John C. (John Christie), 1849-1926.
Date:
1890
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Dr. C. Creighton, M.D. and vaccination : a review / by J. McVail. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Library & Archives Service. The original may be consulted at London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Library & Archives Service.

    16/48 (page 14)
    incision (like Dimsdale), nor that he introduced only a small quantity of matter. But, in the first place, I must amplify a little the quotation from Jenner. Here it is,— / maculated him, and vjas very careful in selecting matter in its most active state. It was taken from the arm of a boy just before the commencement of the eruptive fever, and instantly inserted. The words which I have italicised are those which Jeiiner's critic did not think it necessary to include. Dr Creighton's accusation, therefore, comes to this— that Jenner had the audacity, or rather the folly, to describe as matter in its most active state that which the medical men to whom he was writing (and who were thorouglily acquainted with everything relating to inoculation) were well aware would produce variolation only in the most mitigated form. But surely even Dr Creigliton will not deny that limpid matter should be used alike for variolation and vaccination. Indeed, Jenner's advice as to the latter is almost exactly similar. The limpid fluid should be taken for the purpose of [cow-pox] inoculation, as soon as the vesicle appears sufficiently prominent for that purpose. ^ Then, in regard to the matter being taken from the local pustule of a previous inoculation, Geo. Lipscomb, to whom Dr Creighton refers as a well-known inoculator, deliberately aiming at getting a mere formality of small-pox, says that matter should be taken either from the inoculated part, or, what is preferable in the opinion of the most experienced, from the natural small-pox pustule. And Dimsdale ^ says, It seems of no consequence whether the infecting matter be taken from the natural or inocu- lated small-pox as soon as any fluid can be obtained from it. Thus there was no advantage, in the way of mildness, to be got by using the local pustule, nor any depth of craft on Jenner's part in selecting it for Case III. Nor is Dr Creighton correct in asserting that it was only in this case, and not in some that Jenner had referred to the state of the matter used. In Case V. he says, I inoculated her with active variolous matter. Case XX. was in- oculated with variolous matter immediately taken from a pustule. Case XXIII. was inoculated with variolous matter from a fresh pustule, and to convince myself that the variolous matter made use of was in a perfect state, I at the same time inoculated a patient with some of it who never had gone through the cow-pox, and it produced the small-pox in the usual regular manner. In the course of his references to tlie subject, Jenner argues as follows:—(1.) That variolous matter for inoculation should be taken early (and therefore in a limpid state), in order to get it not only in a condition of variolous activity, but also free from the risks incident to the insertion of pus ; (2.) That it should not be preserved on cloth, corked up in a vial and carried in the warm pocket, so as to induce putrefaction, but, as he says in the 1 Medical and Physical Journal, vol. vi. p. 64. 2 y/,g Present Method of Inoculation, 7th ed., p. 26.