Cargando…
NEUTRALIZATION OF THE VIRUS OF POLIOMYELITIS BY NASAL WASHINGS
1. The results of 56 experiments have shown that washings of the nasal and pharyngeal mucosas possess definite power to inactivate or neutralize the active virus of poliomyelitis. 2. This power is not absolutely fixed, but is subject to fluctuation in a given person. Apparently inflammatory conditio...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
The Rockefeller University Press
1917
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2125500/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19868105 |
Sumario: | 1. The results of 56 experiments have shown that washings of the nasal and pharyngeal mucosas possess definite power to inactivate or neutralize the active virus of poliomyelitis. 2. This power is not absolutely fixed, but is subject to fluctuation in a given person. Apparently inflammatory conditions of the upper air passages tend to remove or diminish the power of neutralization. But irregularities have been noted, even in the absence of these conditions. 3. Too few tests have been made thus far to ascertain whether adults and children differ with respect to the existence of this neutralizing property in the nasal secretions. While the inactivating property was absent from the secretions of one child during the first days of poliomyelitis, it was present in another to whom immune serum was administered, and in still another on the 15th day of illness when convalescence was established. 4. The neutralizing substance is water-soluble and appears not to be inorganic; it appears to be more or less thermolabile, and its action does not depend upon the presence of mucin as such. 5. It is suggested that the production of healthy carriers through contamination with the virus of poliomyelitis may be determined by the presence or absence of this inactivating or neutralizing property in the secretions. Whether this effect operates to prevent actual invasion of the virus and production of infection can only be conjected. Probably accessory and not the essential element on which defense against infection rests. It is more probable that other factors exist which help to determine the issue of the delicate adjustment between contamination and infection. |
---|