In discussing the factors that predispose the body to acute rheumatic fever, the question of allergy is often brought up. Some maintain that acute rheumatic fever is an allergic disease and arises from the intake of foods or exposure to substances to which the body has become oversensitive.
The Journal of the American Medical Association, July 17, 1948, ® commented editorially on the work'-done by Vaubel and Kling, and later substantiated by Hall and Anderson, Rich and Gregory, as well as Moore and Associates at the University of Southern California, which proved that rheumatic fever is a reaction to parenteral contact with foreign protein to which tissues previously had been sensitised and that the human rheumatic heart, by the same token, also arises from parenteral contact with foreign protein to which the cardiac tissues have been previously sensitised.
In other words, rheumatic fever affecting the heart as well as the other organs and parts of the body, arises from an allergy to a foreign protein, which, getting into the body 8Allergic Carditis by ways other than the digestive system, irritates the tissues or parts of the body that have become sensitive to it.
The first question that naturally arises in connection with this is, What causes an allergic condition? If we re-read the reports of Heiser, Pottenger, et ah, we will find that incorrect nutrition plays a vital role in the development of allergy.
Another question then follows: Assuming the body has become sensitised (allergic), what are the foreign proteins that will set the vicious circle in motion? To obtain the answer to this, it is well to bear in mind that vaccines and serums are foreign proteins. Thus, isnt it possible that Lydias attack of rheumatic fever, following the multiple injections in the treatment of her allergic conditions, actually contributed to the onset of this disease?
While the editorial quoted above tries to make a case for the streptococcus, since the streptococcus too is a foreign protein, we wonder whether a much stronger case could not be made against the use of vaccines and serums which are much more dangerous than is generally recognised.