THE prime vie of the new-born animal is free of bacteria and other parasites. A few hours of independent existence suffice, however, to carry to it enough germs to establish a flourishing population, that is never thereafter eradicated.

The micro-organisms which are found in the intestine are swallowed, and consist of varieties common in the dust of the air, in food, and in water. Certain forms derived from milk are more common in the infant than in adults. Many forms must be swallowed, as will be evident when we remember that about twenty species occur in milk, in numbers varying from 20,000 to many millions to the cubit centimeter.

The conditions existing in the alimentary apparatus are prejudicial to many of these organisms, highly favorable to others, so that a certain number for which the most appropriate environment is present establish themselves as regular parasites of the digestive tract.

The mouth has a regular flora of species derived from air, water, foods, etc., and continually receives newcomers, some of the same species as habitual residents, some of new species, so that it is difficult to predict just what micro-organisms may be detected by the examination of the saliva. The organisms of the saliva are continually swallowed, thus finding their way to the stomach. Few of the swallowed organisms succeed, however, in retaining their vitality in the acid gastric juice, and but a small number pass into the duodenum. As the intestine is examined the conditions found prove

to be exactly what should be expected, as the lower down the intestinal contents are examined, the greater will be the number of contained bacteria, until the dried feces of the rectum teem with countless millions.

From the time the first bacterium enters the intestine of the infant there is no time subsequently when it is free of them. From the intestine the bacteria escape with the feces and enter the earth and water, where they are very common organisms.

The most frequent organism of the intestine is the bacillus coli communis or common bacillus of the colon. It is a widespread saprophyte of the soil and water, and is commonly regarded as having its natural habitat in the intestines of animals, though it seems more natural to think of it as a bacterium of the soil, which finds an accidental parasitic existence in the intestine highly satisfactory.

Under ordinary circumstances the intestinal bacteria do no harm. Their metabolism is associated with certain changes in the intestinal contents that are not harmful, and it is supposed that in conditions of constipation with unusual absorption of these products they are eliminated in the urine in the form of ethereal sulphates.

While it cannot be said that the metabolic products of the intestinal bacteria are harmless, it must be said that at the present time they are not known to be harmful, their permanence in the intestine, and the consequent presence of their product being inevitable. According to all our notions of immunity the organism must be immune to them from a very early period.

In disease of the intestinal wall by which its covering epithelium is destroyed and its lymphatics opened, the colon bacillus and other organisms occasionally present in the intestine, invade the tissues and may occasion either local or remote lesions. It is only under these conditions that the colon bacillus becomes harmful.

Occasional strangers among the intestinal flora sometimes cause great mischief, among these being the typhoid bacillus of Eberth, the cholera spirillum of Koch, and the dysentery bacillus of Shiga. It is supposed that all of these organisms enter the body by the mouth and invade it from the intestine, and, in nearly all cases, in each of the diseases mentioned, the respective bacteria are present in the intestine in large numbers at some stage of the disease.

It is, however, doubtful whether the micro-organisms found in the intestinal contents are at fault in these diseases, the indications being that only those which invade the tissues from the intestine, not those remaining in the intestine, are engaged in pathogenic processes. Partly through the misapprehension that the bacteria in the intestinal contents were at fault, and partly in the hope of destroying the bacteria before they succeeded in invading the tissues from the intestine, considerable attention has been paid to the subject of "intestinal disinfection." Indeed, one professional (Nestor) advises that in all digestive disorders treatment be commenced with "a thorough disinfection of the intestinal content."

Consider for a moment the exact significance of that expression. It means to introduce a germicidal substance into the alimentary tract in a concentration sufficient to destroy the life of bacteria, and in quantity sufficient to reach from mouth to anus, and keep it there for a sufficient length of time to act distinctively upon the bacteria, and to accomplish all this without in any manner injuring a sick person.

There is very little that is occult about the operation of disinfectants. They are poisons which act chemically upon the bacterial cells and kill them. In nearly all cases they

act similarly upon animal cells and kill them. In most cases the action is accomplished by a chemical union with proteid substances contained in the body substance of the microorganism, a form of combination that can also occur with other proteid substances, and by which the germicide is itself used up.

The essential conditions for disinfection are, therefore: (1) that a germicidal substance-i.e., one with the power of destroying bacteria-be employed; (2) that it be used in a concentration sufficient to kill the bacteria; (3) that it act upon the bacteria in the absence of all substances interfering with its own integrity; (4) that it be permitted to act upon the bacteria for a sufficient length of time.

When we come to apply these principles to the disinfection of the intestinal canal we find that the conditions given preclude its possibility because: (1) Germicidal substances are all poisons or irritating, so that (2) they cannot be used in the necessary concentration without poisoning the patient or destroying his tissues; (3) the stomach first receives the agent and brings it in contact with its strongly acid contents rich in proteids, albumoses, proteoses, etc., all of which more or less readily combine with most of the germicides, while the quantity of the gastric contents is sufficient to so far dilute the disinfectant as to make it fail to fulfil the second condition; (4) as the disinfectant is thus made inert by dilution or combination before it enters the intestine at all, it is impossible for it to act simultaneously upon the entire twenty feet of intestine to disinfect it.

The ready passage of the intestinal contents from place to place, the prevailing warmth and semi-fluid contents, and the vitality of the organisms contained in the intestine, all combine to make a partial disinfection, even should it be possible, of no

use.

It has been argued that a partial disinfection of the intestines may do some good, but the same difficulties must be overcome, and to administer a small quantity of a disinfec

tant with the hope of achieving a small quantity of disinfection is not to understand the problem. A small quantity of an otherwise useful disinfectant is simply thrown away, as it is diluted and combined until it is entirely worthless before it can reach the intestine, while the feeble and frequently inert substances sometimes recommended for the purpose are of no use whatever.

Some hope at first followed the announcement that Prof. F. G. Novy, of the University of Michigan, had discovered in the organic peroxides, especially benzozone, a substance capable of destroying bacteria in the body, and possibly useful for disinfecting the alimentary tract, but the fact that it is destroyed by proteids has blasted this hope, and the only conclusion that can be reached at the present time is that neither the intestinal tract nor any part of it can be disinfected.—Medicine.

[This assertion will be questioned by plenty of eminent authorities.-Ed. GAZETTE.]

MAN'S ADAPTABILITY TO HIS ENVIRONMENT-ILLUSTRATED BY

THE STOMACH.

DURING the past few weeks, says the Texas Medical News, we have taken it upon ourselves to question and study somewhat a few of the drinkers of our city, from the professional whiskey drinker of sixty years regular imbibing to the individual who goes on an occasional "spree" or "high-lonesome," from the gentlemanly wine tippler to the wholesale "beer guzzler," and after viewing these different people and having them relate their experiences and seeing somewhat a verification of their narrative, we are impressed with what a wonderful organ is the stomach and what wonderful efforts nature puts forth, to adapt herself to her surroundings.

You see the regular drinker take a little for his stomach's sake before breakfast and commences at the first saloon and keeps it

up all day long, with meals and without; to rejoice over good fortune and to drown his sorrows; to make peace with an enemy or to bring courage for a fight, and finally when the lateness of the hour compels the return home, an extra heavy "night cap" is taken on retiring.

Picture for a moment a stomach constantly filled with alcoholics, and see it further tortured by its owner, taking a hot bowl of red-hot chili, with an additional half bottle of pepper sauce.

Did you ever figure out how many different kinds of drinks the American stomach will make away with in twenty-four hours and still allow its possessor to live, not to count the Bologna sausages, chips of cheese and crackers, Wienerwurst, salads, sauces and a thousand other free lunches?

All physicians should do a little original work, and we suggest as a starter that they get a tablet and pencil and have the "saloon bum" (poor fellow, who knows how he first started on his downward career) to keep an itemized list of the time, amount, quality and kind of food, drink or anything else taken in the stomach for twenty-four hours, and they can understand why the stomach specialist is abroad in the land and see the wisdom of having the digestive products from the "hog's stomach" on hand for such

cases.

We simply refer to this phase of the question to urge educational methods upon this important question.

In passing we might say that the liquor tax for the United States amounts to $200,000,000 per year.

AT THE ASYLUM.

DOCTOR-YOur friend is a bad case. I'm afraid we can't cure him.

Patient's Friend-Can't do anything for him, eh?

Doctor-I don't say that. By careful treatment we might be able to reduce the size of the snakes.-Puck.

THE EPILEPTICS THROUGH THE

AGES.

THE word epilepsy has always been a subject of fright and horror. In the time. of the Romans, public assemblies were dissolved when a man fell down in a fit. This event was considered as a forerunner of misforune. This disease was called the holy disease, the divine disease, the sacred disease, the disease of St. Gilles. Fanaticism and superstition caused it to be considered as a chastisement of heaven, subsequent to the perpetration of some crime. Later on it bore the name of the Herculean disease, the lunatic disease, because Hercules was subject to it, and also because of the relations existing between the phases of the moon and the attacks; "Haut mal," because the seat of the disease was in the head; and the falling sickness, because the patients were thrown down to the ground.

The attacks of the disease appear, according to the patients affected, under diverse forms, but there are three stages of the disease to be considered: (1) Cadaveric rigidity, (2) convulsions, (3) muscular prostration. We shall not undertake to describe an attack of epilepsy. Very few of our readers, alas! are ignorant of the sad spectacle of which they have been too often, perhaps, involuntary witnesses. Neither shall we speak of the care to be given the patient during the attack, but we shall indicate the treatment to which the epileptic should be submitted in the interval between the attacks, so as to prevent their return. It should not be forgotten that epilepsy may often terminate by cure. This result specially takes place in case of children. Though possible and even frequent, a cure is less likely to take place after puberty has been reached. In some children epilepsy ceases to appear at about seven or eight years of age, and reappears later on at the age of puberty. A remarkable fact is the cure of an individual who is epileptic up to the age of thirty, when the attacks suddenly disappear and are not renewed, although the individual lives for many years afterward.

This affection was formerly treated in a more or less empirical manner. Later on, to prevent the attacks, assafetida was employed, as well as preparations of copper, musk, mercury, stramonium, etc. Thanks to scientific researches and clinical experiments made some years back, great advances have been made in the treatment of epilepsy.

We owe to Dr. Gélineau a very learned paper on this subject, on the effects of the arsenicated bromide of potassium and of picrotoxin to prevent the epileptic attacks. and to cause them, so to speak, to disappear.

Attacks of epilepsy are more frequently observed at from two to six years of age and from twenty to thirty years of age. Often, unfortunately, it appears in an hereditary way in several successive generations.-Translation.

A NOVELIST'S VIEW OF MEDICINE

OUIDA, that wise lady with the manlike mind, whose books many of us admire tor their brilliant versatility, according to the Medical News, has lately launched a most unexpected diatribe against physicians and scientists in the Humane Review. It reads as though an incensed comet, whose tail a grave astronomer was endeavoring to measure, should say, "Cruel brother and creedmakers, you, who would measure my tail and express it in a formula, behold, I will measure its length upon your narrowing instrument," and with cae sweep should smash his good telescope, and sail away thinking how smart he had been.

According to this article, the physician deliberately cultivates in mankind a terror of disease which renders him an easy prey to it and incidentally fills the physician's pocket. More deadly than the propaganda of the priest is the influence on the multitude of the scientist who "teaches men and women to see possible or probable death in every thing that approaches them," and

leads them “to pass their whole existence in a stench of disinfectants." They are taught to "slink with fear of contamination from the rosy lips of a child and flee from the good-natured gambols of a merry dog."

Certainly it has been of some little value to disinfect after measles, to refrain from kissing a child with diphtheria, and to muzzle dogs that may have rabies. That narrowing cowardice, the deteriorating influence of which Ouida bemoans for the human race, does not work such ravages on the average human system as does any of these curses which science has sought to mitigate. We are tempted to think that Ouida gets her science from the newspa

pers.

And then with an almost feminine lack of logic, she wants to know why the biologist and scientist do not lift their voices against war if they are really so anxious. to save life, and concludes that it is only because the gold would not pour any faster into "the blood-stained apron of the licensed experimenter."

But Ouida knows something about medicine herself. She has had "personal experience of all the symptoms of 'angina pseudomembranosa,'" and has several times seen a physician diagnose a disease as that, when she knew it was not that at all. We think we understand. Some professional man has not been duly impressed by her grasp of scientific subjects; may have intimated that "a little learning is a dangerous thing" or may have explained in a manner calculated to enlighten ignorance something that she knew perfectly well. What could be more odious? And what more natural than that biologists, scientists and physicians the world over should have their egoism and masterful exaggerations pricked by her forceful and discriminating pen!

MEDICAL INFORMATION IN THE LAY PRESS.

(Editorial in Southern Clinic.)

WE notice a request from a medical man of this city in the Evening Leader that a medical column be opened by that paper for the discussion of medical topics for the instruction of the people. The writer suggested that there were many physicians who would be willing to write for this column and intimated that it would be of great value to the people.

Now we have no doubt of the value of the daily paper in informing the people of current events and in a measure forming public opinion and influencing the people.

But we do seriously doubt the propriety or value of opening the columns of the daily paper for dissemination of opinions of medical men on various medical or allied matters

for the edification of

the people or for satisfying curiosity. We all know that "a little learning is a dangerous thing" and certainly no one knows better than the medical man the danger of improper medical teaching. There is no question about the fact that numbers of medical men can be found who will willingly write for such purposes just as soon as the opportunity offers.

The misfortune is that the people are over-instructed already on all matters connected with medicine or surgery, and the more instruction they receive the less they know.

As a rule the medical man, who finds it a philanthropic duty to inform the people through the lay press of the dangers menacing them, is already prepared to disclose to them the fact that he is in position to heal them when they get out of tune a little better and quicker than anybody else-and there is very little difference between this latent advertiser and the one in the advertising columns adjoining the reading matter. One takes space and pays for it like a man; the other gets a rather better advertisement and gets it free. One is a quack; the other is an ethical gentleman.