[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
May 14, 1904


JAMA. 1904;XLII(20):1295. doi:10.1001/jama.1904.02490650033017

Not long ago Heubner in Berlin gave his impressions of the use of antistreptococcus serum in scarlet fever.1 His statements are judicious, non-sensational and apparently wholly fair. Unfortunately his impressions of the value of the serums used (Aronson's, Moser's, Menzer's) are not favorable. Heubner has always believed that while streptococci are not the cause of scarlet fever, yet they are of the greatest importance in determining the mortality and complications of this disease. His experience with the various serums is somewhat limited as to the number of cases (twenty), but the individual cases seem to have been thoroughly well studied. His were selected cases. Those in which improvement succeeded the use of serum were early cases, the exact course of which could not possibly be foretold. In no case did he obtain a distinct impression of unquestioned specific healing by the serum, an experience entirely and diametrically different from