“The result of Koch’s inoculation experiments he (Dr. Formad) discredited, because the successful ones had been made only on animals that have a very strong predisposition to tuberculosis, and contract it from inoculation of non-specific substances, while others, which were claimed to be successful, he regarded as cases of pseudotuberculosis. The view in regard to the bacilli tuberculosis to which Dr. Formad inclined, was that they do not cause the disease, while it is likely that they do ‘condition the fatal disease.’ The remarks were received with marked interest, and were followed by a brief discussion, participated in by Drs. Wood, Gross, Tyson, Bartholow, Cohen, and others. Some of the speakers seem to have adopted Koch’s views, and it was spoken of as a matter of congratulation that one so well fitted as Dr. Formad should have presented the arguments against them, since the truth would be arrived at all the more surely if the new doctrine were put upon its defence, and not allowed to establish itself without due scrutiny.”—Philadelphia Med. News, Oct. 28, 1882. (Reprinted in Med. Times, Dec. 2, 1882.)
“Dr. Koch’s conclusions enjoy a very considerable succès d’estime, but that esteem would perhaps be less were it clearly understood that the original intention, and indeed the justification, of the method of dry cultivation has been quietly dropped, while the method itself has been put to a use for which it is not at all suited.”—Med. Times, July 15, 1882, p. 78.
“As yet we have no certain instance of animals falling spontaneously ill of cholera in periods of cholera. All experiments also, which have hitherto been made on animals with cholera substances, have either given a negative result, or, if they were said to give a positive result, they were not sufficiently supported by evidence, or were disputed by other experimenters. We occupied ourselves, nevertheless, in the most careful and detailed manner, with experiments on animals. Because great value must be laid on the results on white-mice obtained by Thiersch. I took fifty mice with me from Berlin, and made all kinds of experiments on them,” but … “our mice remained healthy. We then made experiments on monkeys, cats, poultry, dogs, and various other animals that we were able to get hold of; but we were never able to arrive at anything in animals similar to the cholera-process.… Hence, I think, that all the animals on which we can make experiments, and all those, too, which come into contact with human beings, are not liable to cholera.… We must, therefore, dispense with them as a material for affording proofs.”—Koch’s “Address to the German Board of Health,” “Brit. Med. Journ.,” Sept. 6, 1884, p. 454.
Kölliker, Rudolph Albrecht. B. 1817, at Zurich; Studied Univs. Zurich, Bonn, and Berlin; For. Asst. to Henle, M.D., Zurich, 1843; Prof. Physiol. and Comp. Anat., Zurich, 1845; Prof. at Wurzburg, 1847.
Author “Handbuch der Gewebelehre des Menschen, für Aertzte und Studirende,” Leipsig, 1852; “Entwickelungsgeschichte des Menschen und der Höheren Thiere,” Leipsig, 1861; “Untersuchungen ueber die Letzten Endigungen der Nerven,” Leipsig, 1862 (in progress).
Krabbe, H. M.D.; Prof. of Physiol. and Anat. at Roy. Vet. Coll., Copenhagen.
Kraft (Dr.), Breslau. Asst. Prof. at the Path. Institute.
Kries, J. Von. Prof. Univ. Freiburg in Baden; Lec. Physiol. Movement and Sensation, Physiol. Inst.
Author of “Untersuchungen zur Mechanik des quergestreiften Muskels,” Arch. f. Anat. und Physiol., Vol. for 1880; “Die Gesichtsempfindungen und ihre Analyse,” Arch. f. Physiol., 1882 (Supplement).
Krivoratow, M., Moscow. Medical Student Strasburg; pupil of Prof. Goltz.