A case of puerperal fever due to mixed infection by diptheria bacilli and streptococci, and its treatment by the specific antitoxic and antimicrobic serums

THE CONCLUSIONS I HAVE ARRIVED AT FROM A STUDY OF THE PRESENT CASE:I. Not to think that by giving a disease a name e.g. Puerperal fever, we have explained its nature and causationII. Not to think that anti-septics, such as perchloride of mercury, will act as Fetish irrespective of the biological characters of the organisms we seek to destroy.III. Not to fit our theories to our cases but to build our theories on all the symptoms of the case.IV. Not to spare ourselves any labour in endeavouring to unravel the causes of our patient's disease.V. To remain always students and whilst keeping a receptive mind towards the theories and others not to bow too readily to authority but with Whitman to reserve the sacred right of revolt.VI. To prevent the proposed legislation which would entrust lying-in women to the care of woman qualified only in one branch of medicine and without the requisite training that would enable them to cope with such a case as the present one which, as a matter of fact was left to be treated by a midwife during the first three days of the disease.VII. To do all in our power to prevent needless loss of blood and fatigue in puerperal women by scrupulous care in the direction of early instrumental interference in prolonged labor to prevent fatigue and by careful extraction of the placenta and subsequent care to keep the uterus contracted and thus prevent loss of blood.VIII. To endeavour to obtain a serum (or complementary sera) which shall be at the some time antibacterial and anti-toxic towards diphtheria bacilli thence towards the symbiotic streptococci.IX. Not to waste time in petty squabbles with professional brethren but to do honest work in the laboratory so far as time will commit