This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal

ALEX J. S. McFADZEAN, M.B., Ch.B.(Glas.), M.R.C.P.

A.M.A. Arch Neurol Psychiatry. 1952;67(4):451-461.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

PRIOR to the introduction of antirabies vaccine by Pasteur in 1885, both furious and paralytic rabies had been described as occurring in man. The latter was apparently rare, and, although described by van Swieten in 1753, its occurrence was not widely known. Shortly after the introduction of the vaccine, fatal cases of paralysis, occurring during or after treatment, were recorded. These were ascribed by Pasteur and his protagonists to the street virus, producing "dumb" rabies; in other words, the vaccine had failed to protect. They insisted that the fixed virus of the vaccine was harmless. Pasteur's antagonists were quick to draw a parallel between the fatal paralysis and the state of rabbits infected with fixed virus and claimed that the fixed virus of the vaccine was responsible. The condition was somewhat caustically termed by Peter, Pasteur's chief antagonist, rage de laboratoire. The hypothesis that the fixed virus was innocuous was . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
HONG KONG

Footnotes
Professor, Department of Medicine, University of Hong Kong.