LECTURE XXI.

SEVERAL QUESTIONS CONSIDERED.

CONTAGION-QUANTITY OF FOOD PER DAY-THE BATH-TUB-REDUC TION OF WEIGHT.

My Friends the Readers :

The several questions you have raised I agree to consider only, to answer is quite another matter.

DEAR DOCTOR :

We are all agreed that it is very much better for us to await hunger before eating, but what are we to do if for instance we are called into rooms in the morning where there are contagious diseases, as diphtheria, etc. You know that it is not even doubted that under such conditions the safety lies in having full stomachs.

Signed,

MANY READERS.

This is a question no less interesting than important. When I was in attendance on those cases of diphtheria I saw them early in the mornings. I took an empty stomach into the sick-room always, when seeing them before noon, and for the following reasons:

1. Because I had no hunger in the morning.

2. Because I wanted the best possible use of brain function, where reason and judgment were wanted in my highest possibility, and hence,

3. I could not afford to part with any of its force to be exhausted over the disposal of an unbidden meal.

4. I could only lose by the mental and physical effort a little of those tissues which could be easily spared.

5. With the brain duly and adequately nourished, the blood and vital power would be in a stronger defensive condition against the millions of microbes that were doubtless drawn in with every inhalation. At this present moment I really know of no such potent defense against the microbe as rich blood. Had I taken an unbidden meal before starting out, I should have gotten well under way the first stage of indigestion, which by as much would have been the first stage of disease.

This would detract brain force from where, from professional reasons, it would be vitally needed, and would also take from the countenance something of that serenity of hope that needs to shine in the rooms of the dangerously sick, beyond all other places.

Again, I have often seen mothers watch over these cases day after day and night after night, and keep up their strength with their stomachs practically empty much of the time, and without getting a hint of the disease themselves. They could not eat because anxiety had created an intense aversion to food, and aversion is proof against all theories as to the need of filled stomachs in the presence of malignant diseases.

Now, my curious readers, it was safer for me to go into those sick-rooms than for you because of the absence of apprehension. It would have been all the more necessary for you to have gone there with empty stomachs, for the reasons you forgot when you raised the question. The shock of bad news and terror will

paralyze digestion; and fear, apprehension, depresses in its degree down to total absence of it. Shall you then fill your stomachs before entering such rooms for protective reasons only, fill up and then go into an atmosphere of gloom and of apprehension, where by as much the very draft that is the motive power of digestion is withdrawn? Fill up the firebox of " 999," shut off the draft, and expect a mile to be made in thirtytwo seconds? I think not. You forgot not only all this, but that wonderful bill of fare which so cares for the brain, when you raised the question.

This is all the answer I am able to give, and until, if I am wrong, I get into the true light, I shall continue to recklessly expose my life, not only to the microbes of diphtheria, but to those of other communicable diseases by making my morning calls with an empty stomach, and making my later ones, after digestion has balanced the books for me.

And now for another question.

DEAR DOCTOR :

There is a very prevalent theory that a human body needs the digestion of 59 oz. of food as a daily average. What have you to say to this?

Signed,

MANY READERS.

To this I may reply that the theory is utterly absurd. As well supply such a theory to the firebox of a locomotive. As the size of the locomotive, the number of cars to be drawn, and the elevation of the grades determine the amount of fuel, so does it for every human being; 59 oz. would be easily handled by the axman, but how about your professor who has had only that general muscular exercise called out by getting ap

pareled, and with the only addition thereto of a short walk to his class-room? All day, and every day, his quantity of exercise will be infinitely less than the axman takes. How wisely has Nature provided for the needed exercise in the case of children whereby the appetite shall be strong and the ounces of food shall be duly disposed of even with less harm when in excess, than could be borne at mature age. It would seem that general exercise is very important in childhood, in boyhood, or there would not be those tastes that incite the rudest sports, the gymnastic tumblings, fence and tree-climbing, etc.

The number of ounces of food that any person shall take into his stomach during any day, must depend upon the exact amount of tissue burned up through bodily activity. As a rule the fuel offered to human waste is far in excess of the demand, and they are the greatest sinners in this way whose affairs do not call out general muscular activities, and the only way to meet this difficulty is to keep the hunger of childhood and youth duly provided for by having the supplies offered at duly prolonged intervals.

And here is another very interesting question.

DEAR DOCTOR :

Thus far we have not even once heard the word "bath-tub" mentioned; if you have any views on this as a subject of any importance we should be pleased to hear them. "Cleanliness being next to Godliness," it would seem that so striking a virtue had not escaped your consideration.

Signed,

MANY READERS.

I will consider this question only. As a means of

"saving grace," the bath-tub is getting more and more into prominence, and what was once a luxury only to the wealthy, is becoming a necessity which is gradually getting into the reach of moderate means.

But the world at large must go on as the "great unwashed," and die prematurely, because lack of time and of means must avail against this "life-saving ordinance."

Mark Twain has described the pale, sallow, lifeless-appearing inhabitants of an ague-smitten district of the Mississippi who live, breathe, have a being, but who never move when it can be avoided. The shakes in their cases being merciful dispensations of Providence whereby they get needed exercise without any exertion put forth voluntarily.

The bath-tub as a modern institution is made the most of, as a general fact, by those who have the means and the leisure to use it for the alleviation of ailments that are never cured. I was once assured by a man in good business and social standing, living in a fine residence, with the bath-tub annex, who, beyond his sixty-fifth year, was the picture of robust health; said he, "Doctor, I have not bathed in forty years, and my body is as clean as an infant's!" Was this a case of special "dispensation"? Or is there a general dispensation all along the "ranks" and "files" whereby life may be automatically preserved ?

Let us see: The human body, except the face, hands and feet, as instinctively shrinks from contact with water, especially if it be below blood heat, as does the body of a cat.

The human skin has a degree of oil in it which gives it due softness and prevents it from an undue evaporation of the water it contains. It also protects in a