The sun., 1903-05-03

not yarrsnt ~ distinction drawn By Prof.
Martins IN this volume between hygiene,
or public health. and personal. or individ.
ual, prophyIsxis. Prof. Martins holds that
there is an antasonism Of principle be-
tween these two things, for he says: In.
deed, II cannot be denied that there Ia q
great gulf, q dreadful contradiction. boz
tween the aims Of the hygiene OF the indi-
vidual and the hygiene Of the raoc. BY
hygiene al applied to individuals the
physician strives to improve the life even
of the most wretched human being. and
ms efforts are the greater the more feeble
Is the individual but the hygiene Of the
raoe has for its ultimate aim pitlleasly
to eliminate persons Of weakly constitu-
lions. and thus to improve the people
IA whole" There ia no doubt that Prof.
Martins IA here expressing a broader con-
csption Of preventive medicine than Ia
understood by the term in Great Britain
or the United States. 50 far as these
countries are concerned, It is not qies-
tion which, az yet, calls for practical con-
sideration whether or no tho perpetua-
tion. and consequent opportunity for prop
measure from an evolutionary view
point.
BY individual medica! prophylaxis is
meant. according to Prof. Martins, the
sum total of medical counsel and rules
intended to protect the individual human
being against disease. In this sense mod
ical prophylaxis guides the individual
through the entire course OF life from the
cradle to the grave" DR.. Rosen defines
the goal of individual prophylaxis when
he Gays; The physician ought not to wait
until he discovers an impaired note at
the apex Of the lung, or hears rAles. or
till the discovery Of tubercle bacilli with
the microscope makes the suspected d.
agnosis OF tuberculosis certainty, before
he begins TO treat the patient hygienically
and dietetically." Prof. Martins expresses
the same idea when he says that "to bring
up a weakly child who may be hereditarily
tainted 80 that it shall not succumb to
the threatening danger OF tuberculous
infection is individual medical prophyl-
axis Again, Prof. Mendelsohn OF Ber-
lin, who, al We have said, contributes Q
chapter on the prevention Of diseases Of
the heart insists that "a truly scientific
prophylaxis Of heart disease can only be
carried out by the physician who makes
functional diagnosis, not an anatomical
one. 1t is not enough merely to auscul-
tate and percuss and. because nothing
abnormal has been detected by this pro-
cedure, TO conclude that special prophy-
Tactic measures are unnecessary.
Even when there is no organic abnor-
mslity present In the heart It's condition and
functional capacity should be determined
In every possible position OF the body
,vhA eit vyhnv 1xyinN
at rest, and after different degrees Of bodily
puts 1t, while against old age there 10 no
prophylaxis, We can. by well-regulated pre-
ventive action. postpone tho death which
seems the inevitable penalty Of birth.
SinEulsrly interesting will be found DR..
Colds chmidts review Of the history OF tho
prevention OF diseases. It Is known, for
instance. that the ancient Egyptians re-
garded cleanliness in tho light OF divine
commandment, that they had regulations
about food. the enforcement Of which was
intrusted to the priests. and that they
endeavored to exclude epidemic disease
by quarantine. The prophylAotio laws,
which In Egypt were intended only for the
priesthood, were made binding upon all
the Israelits people by Moses, the pupil
Of Egyptian prests. II is remarkable how
severely In the Mosaic law any breach Of
hygienic regulations is dealt with. To
break the rules Of health was looked upon
among tho Israelites a. falling away from
God. as a sin. the direct consequence OF
which was punishment at Gods hands.
The Moeaic announcement that thy sins
shall be visited unto the third and fourth
generations" does not conform TO our
sense Of Justice, but 1t expresses what care
full observation shows to hold good for
medical Gins. The fact that, although the
Jews are no longer a nation, and never
pot sessed a national life for moro than
Ave hundred years. the jewish race still
existe, is attributed by DR.. Colds chmidt
in no small measure to the scrupulous way
In which they have conformed to- the Bib
lcal laws Of hygiene. The best known OF
these hygienic laws refer to food. Here, no
doubt, correct observation is mixed up with
superetitiuus ideas. The Israelite law,
for inr tance, that the blood Of slaughtered
animals shall be drained away rests upon
the superx titious idea that life has its origin
In the blood. or that the spirit dwells In the
blood. Hence the rule that no part Of an
animals body may be used for food until
all the blood has been removed by salt
and water.
In spite Of the superstitious origin Of
the custom, 1t Is q valuable preventive
regulation In hot countries Salt. Of course,
is good for the preservation Of the meat,
and meat deprived of its blood Is far lcss
apt 70 deoompose than meat which still
contains blood. The law that tho flesh
of slaughtered animal should not be eaten
later than the third day, and, II not then
eaten, must be burnt, seems . sensible
regulation in countries who're putrefaotion
sets In early and proceeds rapidly. Again,
the Mosaic prohibitions extend TO the eating
OF those animals which experience has
taught may cause disease. such as .ths
flesh Of swine. Of cats and Of certain
rodents which Luther translated rabbits.
which probably are rats. Recent research
has shown that the last-named animals
are apt to harbor trichine, for which reason
vifchow pronounoes Moses one Of the
greatest physicians known to history.
Animals leading FREQ life, such as beasts
OF prey or objects Of the chase. may not
be used for food. partly to discourage tho
love OF hunting, which the Bible regards
as cruel sport, partly because It is i'm
possible TO control the food Of such animals,
and they sometirnes eat things which may
III