The Popular Science Monthly, June, 1900: Vol. 57, May, 1900 to October, 1900Various
Science
The Popular Science Monthly, June, 1900: Vol. 57, May, 1900 to October, 1900
Various
Science -- Periodicals; Technology -- Periodicals
It may be interesting to relate that this important discovery was
made unintentionally, and represents one of those happy ‘accidents’
which occur to those who diligently search. Pasteur had been working
with cultures of chicken-cholera microbes, an extremely fatal form
of virus when it is introduced into fowls and small birds. It so
happened that one of his cultures was left forgotten in the incubator
when work was stopped for the vacation. On the return of Pasteur and
his assistants the experiments were continued. When the bottle was
discovered, thinking that the microbes might have been exhausted or
dead from long starvation, Pasteur tried to make what is called a
fresh culture of them, by inseminating a sample from the old bottle
into a freshly prepared nutritious broth. The microbes were not dead,
and multiplied and grew luxuriantly; but when they were injected into
a fowl they caused only a transient and non-fatal disease. To make a
fresh start, Pasteur took some old blood, which he had drawn a long
time previously from a chicken-cholera fowl and preserved in a cupboard
in the laboratory in a sealed-up tube, and made a culture with the
material that was in that tube. The culture thus obtained killed
fresh fowls as usual, but when it was injected into the bird that had
resisted the first culture it resisted this injection also. Pasteur,
who excelled all men I ever knew in his ability of quickly analyzing
and discerning true connections between facts, required no further
hints. Others might perhaps have dwelt on the peculiarity of the fowl
that happened to resist the injections, or on some other circumstances.
Pasteur relinquished this and other suggestions at once, and thought
of the microbe. The fact that old specimens of microbes may become
impotent when injected into animals was known to him, and was readily
explained by the vitality of such microbes being lowered or exhausted
by starvation. But, then, such a microbe when transferred into a fresh
medium, if not dead, generally regains its vigor, and after that, when
inoculated into an animal, it produces its usual effect. The remarkable
circumstance about the culture left in the incubator was that even when
it was transferred into a fresh medium and its vitality renewed, it
remained still impotent. Pasteur concluded from this that an infectious
microbe possesses two distinct properties: one, which it shares with
any other living being--viz., _vitality_--which may be weakened or
strengthened according to the conditions of life and food; and another,
which he considered as its ‘virulence,’ its power of causing diseases,
which may be also weakened or strengthened by special means, but which
is quite independent of ‘vitality.’
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account