Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T15:18:42.702Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Serological Diagnosis of the Enterica

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 May 2009

Adrianus Pijper
Adrianus Pijper
Affiliation:
(Pathologist, Pretoria Hospital, S. Africa.)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This paper is written from the practical point of view of a laboratory worker who is daily in direct contact with the cases submitted to him for diagnosis. Its purpose is to prove the inefficiency of the Widal reaction as a diagnostic test, and to urge its replacement by a more satisfactory method. Such a method is to be found in the application of the discoveries and theories on agglutination of Weil and Felix (1920), Felix (1924 and 1929), and Felix and Olitzki (1928 and 1929).

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Hygiene , Volume 29 , Issue 4 , February 1930 , pp. 380 - 393
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1930

References

REFERENCES

Bitter, L. (1917). Centralbl. f. Bakt. I, Abt. 79, 145.Google Scholar
Bitter, L. (1920). Centralbl. f. Bakt.. 85, 112.Google Scholar
Bohnenkamp, H. and Kliewe, H. (1927). Deutsches Arch. f. kl. Med. 158, 16.Google Scholar
Burnet, F. M. (1924). Brit. J. Exp. Path. 5, 251.Google Scholar
Felix, A. (1924). Zeitschr. f. Immunitätsf. 39, 127.Google Scholar
Felix, A. (1924). J. Immunol. 9, 115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felix, A. (1929). J. Hygiene, 28, 418.Google Scholar
Felix, A. and Olitzki, L. (1928). J. Hygiene. 28, 55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felix, A. and Olitzki, L. (1929). Brit. J. Exp. Path. 10, 26.Google Scholar
Felix, A. and Robertson, M. (1928). Brit. J. Exp. Path.. 9, 6.Google Scholar
Gardner, A. D. (1929). J. Hygiene, 28, 376.Google Scholar
Groetschel, (1927). Klin. Wochenschr. p. 895.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hadjopoulos, L. G. (1922). J. Infect. Dis. 31, 226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herderschêe, D. (1929). Nederl. T. v. Geneesk. 73, I, 1708.Google Scholar
Hilgers, W. E.Wohlfeil, T. and KnöTzge, F. (1928). Klin. Wochenschr. 44.Google Scholar
Kalthoff, K. (1917). Centralbl. f. Bakt. 1, Abt. 79, 145.Google Scholar
Koritschoner, R. (1917). Centralbl. f. Bakt.. 79, 193.Google Scholar
Kleinsorgen, W. (1921). Zeitschrift f. Hyg. 92, 158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Löhr, H. (1924). Deutsche med. Wochenschr. 50, 536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oster, F. (1925). Deutsche med. Wochenschr.. 51, 1653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pijper, A. (1923). S. Afr. Med. Record, 02. 10th and 24th.Google Scholar
Pijper, A. and Pullinger, B. D. (1926). Papers S. Afr. Med. Congress.Google Scholar
Pijper, A. and Pullinger, B. D. (1928). Brit. Med. J. 04 7th.Google Scholar
Schmitz, H. (1916). Centralbl. f. Bakt. I, Abt. 78, 221.Google Scholar
Snijders, E. P. (1927). Nederl. T. v. Geneesk. 71, 2, 177.Google Scholar
Stuart, G. and Krikorian, K. S. (1928). J. Hygiene, 28, 105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weil, E. (1921). Zeitschrift f. Immunitätsf. 31, 50.Google Scholar
Weil, E. and Felix, A. (1920). Zeitschrift f. Immunitätsf.. 29, 24.Google Scholar