Note 45 — Chapter VI · CRIMINAL JURISPRUDENCE—PELLAGRA—AGRARIAN REFORM

In view of the fact that shortly after the death of Lombroso it was widely asserted both in the medical and the lay Press of this country and of the United States that Lombroso’s views regarding the nature of pellagra had recently been shown to be erroneous, I wrote to Dr. Kurella for further information. He replied as follows: “On receipt of your letter, I wrote to an Italian colleague to inquire of him what were the views presently held regarding the etiology of pellagra. He informs me that the majority of experimental pathologists in Italy remain convinced of the truth of Lombroso’s views. He also refers me to this year’s (1910) Wiener Klinische Wochenschrift, No. 23, p. 963, where there is an article by Raubitschek, an Austrian experimenter, who claims to have confirmed Lombroso’s theory by means of experiments on rats.”

Unquestionably, therefore, numerous investigators, both in Italy and elsewhere, hold fast by one form or other of the zeist theory of the etiology of pellagra, which Lombroso believed himself to have established beyond the possibility of refutation. But during the past year this theory has, nevertheless, been largely discredited. In the Lancet of February 12, 1910, will be found the report of the Pellagra Investigation Commission, in which some of the alternative hypotheses are discussed. Dr. Sambon was despatched by this Commission in charge of the Pellagra Field Commission in Italy, and in an editorial note in the British Medical Journal of May 21, we are told that a telegram had been received from Dr. Sambon, under date of May 13, stating “The Commission has definitely proved that maize is not the cause of pellagra; the parasitic conveyor is the Simulium reptans.” It is probable that the matter will soon be definitely settled, and it cannot be denied that pellagra presents many analogies with other endemic disorders due to protozoal infection conveyed by the bite of a blood-sucking insect.—Translator.