The Bennington banner. [volume] (Bennington, Vt.) 1858-1894, 1894-03-30
CATCHING COLD.
A Theory That Wet and Drafts Have Moth
ing to Do With 1t.

A Theory That Wet and Drafts Have Moth
ing to Do With 1t.
A new and startling theory about 'tak-
ing cold" is making some way and accu-
mulating evidence in its favor. One of tho
chief opponents of this doctrine is Ger
man physician, who has based his prac-
tice on it for more than 10 years, and his
results are so striking and of such very
great Importance that an account of a re-
cent visit to him will be of general inter
est. The great Importance of his theory
lies in the fact that it is an inference from
it that the usual means of cure for colds,
and still more the usual means of proven
ton, are Numerically the opposite OF
what they should be, and SO are not only
ineffective, but produce the very opposite
of the desired result. According to oul
doctor, what we usually do to avoid colds
are the very things which cause colds.
In word, the theory is that colds ara
infectious diseases, and not the mere re-
suits of drafts or cold air, which, it is
maintained, are in themselves harmless,
or, at all events, very nearly so.
The time honored idea that colds are
caused by drafts, wet, cold chills and so
on is declared to be nothing but super
stition. OF course, people will say they
know they catch colds from drafts, be-
cause they have colds after they have felt
a draft. But we must be on our guard
against the old fallacy of post hoe proptel
hoe Because we have a cold after feeling
a draft it does not necessarily follow that
the draft was the cause, and our doctor
has a mass of facts to show that it was
not. His patients sit in drafts habitually
and do not take cold.
Whenever we find ourselves with cold,
it is at least always possible that we have
caught it from some one else, for colds are
so common that we are certain to have
been lately in the company of some one
with cold. There is, therefore, always at
least the possibility of another cause than
the draft.
But the draft and the cold do often seem
very strongly to be cause and effect, and,
on the other hand, we do not notice any
connection between meeting person with
a cold and taking cold ourselves Why is
this2 Our DOCTORS explanation is very
simpler
First-He thinks he has discovered that
an ordinary cold takes about ten days or
fortnight to develop from the time of in
lection. Hence, of course, the explanation
of the second part of the mystery. Natu-
rally, when we perceive we have a cold,
we do not think of connecting it with an
event which happened a fortnight ago,
which was too common to make any men,
tai impression, and which we have, there
fore, quite forgotten.
Second-We are told that the symptom
of the cold having reached a certain stage
of development is feeling of chill and
our doctors will have it that the chill we
were sensible of is this internal chill and
not chill from the draft, or that we only
felt chill from the draft because we had
already cold which had arrived at this
stage; hence the seeming obviousness OF
the connection between the draft and the
cold.
Third-A third reason, which no doubt
helps to convince us that the draft was the
active cause, is the preconviction or estab
lished orthodox belief which we all hold
that the usual cause of colds is draft.
Holding this belief, when we find ourselves
with cold, we naturally search our men,
DRY for recollection of any draft, and if we
have been in one recently are at once sure
that is the cause, merely because of this
orthodox belief. Do we ever similarly in
quire what people with colds we have been
in contact with?-Westminster Gazette.