[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 34.237.51.35. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Other Articles
November 1930

THE DEVELOPMENT OF SCARLET FEVER RASH AND OF THE POSITIVE SKIN REACTION: EXPERIMENTAL AND CLINICAL STUDIES ON THE ANAPHYLAXIS THEORY OF SCARLET FEVER

Author Affiliations

DAIREN, MANCHURIA
From the Government Isolation Hospital.

Am J Dis Child. 1930;40(5):1024-1031. doi:10.1001/archpedi.1930.01940050086009
Abstract

Szontagh,1 von Groer,2 Meyer3 and Dochez and Stevens4 belong to the group of specialists who advocate the anaphylaxis theory of scarlet fever. Szontagh refers to eosinophilia as proof that scarlet fever is an anaphylactic reaction. Of course, eosinophilia is noted in an anaphylactic shock, but everyone showing eosinophilia cannot be said to be in an anaphylactic condition.

Dochez apparently based his argument on the fact that a rabbit treated with the streptococcus toxin of scarlet fever develops an anaphylactic skin reaction. It may be expected that when, after a rabbit has been treated with the toxin, the skin test is carried out on the rabbit repeatedly with the same toxin, an anaphylactic reaction should be caused by the heat-stable endotoxin contained in the Dick toxin. However, when a rabbit is treated with the heat-labile exotoxin contained in the Dick toxin and is subjected to repeated skin

×