When I accepted the changes, taking place without medical aid, interruption and interference, as true cures, and so much a part of nature, and so intimately blended with the fixed laws of nature that like results could be looked for with the same degree of certainty that we look for the rising or setting of the sun, I busied myself in formulating a plan of cure as nearly in accordance with natural laws as I could. I am now, and have been for twenty years, developing in this line, and I have gone far enough to declare that I have watched symptoms start, mature, and decline, and in this way have learned, by contrasting the symptoms in a given ease that has not been medicated, with those of a similar case that has been medicated, to know the full value of symptoms under medication, as well as the full value of the symptoms when not under medication. This knowledge I am using in analyzing this medical classic and from my standpoint I can see how very easy it was for the author of the article under consideration to blunder along as he did. The doctor should not feel lonesome, however, for he has a world of company.]

"This condition lasted nearly twenty-four hours; then a very large and hard stool, followed by a thin one of hemorrhagico-purulent character was discharged and simultaneously a decided change took place. The appearance and pulse improved; the abdomen became softer with the exception of the marked resistance upon the right side low down, and the fever slightly remittent, its maximum 101 degree F. Vomiting did not recur; the patient moved about somewhat in bed and slept several hours in a half-lateral posture. Meat jelly and cold beef tea were swallowed."

[This feeding was the beginning of mistakes for the second round. If this patient had been left distressingly along until he could have thrown off his opium poison and become normal, and allowed the abscess to drain and close, all would have been well. This, I assume, would have been the ending if the vigorous examination that was given the patient the day before the collapse had not prematurely ruptured the abscess both into the gut and into the subperitoneal region converting an appendicular abscess into a perityphlitic one.]

"Upon the next day there were several hemorrhagico-purulent stools, the urine was profuse and voided without pain. Nevertheless, firm, flat resistance was still felt in the lower right side and upon pressure there was lancinating pain no fever."

[What was the need of this everlasting, eternal, never-ending manipulating to find how much induration there was? Nothing but harm could come from such senseless officiousness. The punching, feeling and manipulating of patients without a reasonable excuse is a very bad habit, one that is peculiar to young and inexperienced men. There is no reason, no object, no purpose in it; it is just a bad habit.]

"There could be no doubt that the perityph abscess had ruptured into the intestine, and that in consequence of this the diffuse peritonitis had at once been relieved."

[There was no peritonitis up to this time, except the small portion that represented the peritoneal covering of the organ or organs involved in the primary infection. The peritoneal cavity, or the peritoneum as an organ, was not involved in this disease; hence it is an error to say that there was diffuse peritonitis which was at once relieved by the rupturing of the abscess into the intestine. It is worth something to know the difference between a drug-created phantom peritonitis and a true peritonitis. It is not for the sake of controversy that I am taking exceptions to the opinions advanced in this case, neither is it because I delight in criticizing, differing from or finding fault with authority; I have a more laudable reason—one that I consider humane and justifiable—namely, to point out to the few who happen to read this book, a safe and life-preserving plan of treating one of the most talked about, and (because of bad—decidedly bad—treatment) one of the most fatal maladies of this age. To do this it is necessary to point out and teach these few how to reason on the subject, and how to weigh with something like exactness the various important symptoms that present themselves under varying styles of treatment.

If a young physician is guided in his opinions by authority—if he believes that the last word has been said, because he has the last book from the leading authority, and if said authority has not yet learned that there is a true and a phantom diffuse peritonitis, said young man is not in line for saving life; on the contrary, he is liable to mismanage and meet with as great a failure, and be the cause of as unnecessary a death as was the good doctor from whom we are quoting and of whose medical sophistry I am trying to give the true qualitative and quantitative analysis.

Rupture into the gut is exactly what will happen every time, in all cases, if left alone and no food nor drugs given.]

"Treatment: Warm, followed by hot, flaxseed poultices; rest, freshly expressed meat juice or beef tea, in all 200 grams; thin gruel made with milk, 200 grams; wine, 100 grams in twenty-four hours, small portions to be taken every two hours; no drugs."

[A little over six ounces of meat juice and six ounces of gruel made with milk! The starch contained in the gruel will always create gas in these cases and stimulate peristalsis; the gas inflates the cecum and drives the contents of the bowels into the abscess cavity; this sets up secondary inflammation. The meat juice and wine could have been left out to the patient's betterment. It is refreshing to know that no drugs were given, and if the case had been treated from the start on the no-drug plan the course and ending would have been very different. The poultices would have done as much good if they had been put on the leg of his bed, and much less harm.]

"This improvement continued for several days and even became more marked The abdomen returned to the norm with the exception of the ileo-cecal region; there was a small stool daily without recognizable pus; no fever.

"Upon the twelfth day of the disease vomiting suddenly recurred with severe diffuse abdominal pain, marked meteorism, and fever to about 102.2 degree F.;"

[True, diffuse peritonitis set in at this time.]

"the symptoms increased in severity, and changed during the collapse, his temperature 97.3 degree F., pulse 160, thready, uneven; conspicuous facies hippocratica; no pain; a slight comatose condition, moderate meteorism, no movement of the bowels. Stimulants were without effect; subcutaneous saline infusion revived the patient but only for a short time? and death occurred the following morning upon the fourteenth day of the disease."

[Meteorism! What at is it? A blown-up condition of tile bowels. Gruel caused gas to form the gas was driven into the abscess cavity, reinfection took place? which ended in diffuse peritonitis. The patient's resistance was used up and, being exhausted he died. He had made a brave fight a against all sorts of odds but the second round was too much for him.]

"Autopsy: Normal condition of the scrosa above the omentum: the appendix surrounded by adhesions embedded in fecal pus? gangrenous toward its terminal portion, and showing perforation; fecal calculus in the pus; appendix movable toward the cecum."

[Just what may be expected in all cases! Nature is always busy reinforcing weak points, but the modern physician and surgeon is too wily and artful for her; she can't always anticipate his moves, hence she can't always fortify successfully.]

"Agglutinated point of rupture at the median periphery of the cecum near the ileo-cecal valve. The perityphlitic pus appeared to be sacculated by adherent intestinal coils, but beyond the adhesions in the free abdominal cavity below the omentum there was diffuse, fresh, fibrinous peritonitis and distributed here and there small quantities of thin, putrid pus (many bacteria, large quantities of streptococci and cold bacilli). The peritoneum was injected. of a delicate rose-red color, here and there covered with fine, mucus-like pseudo-membranes. Heart flabby."

[The autopsy showed nothing more than would be expected. The fresh peritonitis confirms what I say that a reinfection was forced because of the character of the food. The meteorism opposed relaxation and rest, two conditions positively necessary and without which healing can not take place. What was to hinder the heart from being flabby, Drugs and systemic infection are quite enough.

In proper hands this young man would not have been very sick; possibly his trouble would have been thrown off and the inflammation passed off by resolution.

The following should be of interest for it is a very scientific explanation of how the young man came to die:]

"The clinical history is in every respect typical and instructive.

"It shows us that the origin of peritonitis which is by far the most common, is in a diseased appendix. At the autopsy this was found necrotic and perforated. It is questionable whether the perforation existed from the onset of the disease; it is possible that at first an ulcer extending to the serosa caused an infection of the peritoneum; at all events this occurred acutely, and produced the sharply defined disease."

[I agree. The perforation brought on the relapse and the collapse.]

"The clinical abdominal symptoms in the first period of the malady pointed to the fact that at the onset there had been a diffuse inflammation of the peritoneum, and that later, by the adhesions to the appendix which were found at the autopsy an early encapsulation of pus had taken place in the ileo-cecal region; this produced a purulent softening in the wall of the cecum and led to the favorable rupture of pus into the intestine and to an immediate amelioration of the acute peritonitis. The point of rupture, however, then closed, and partly perhaps to the action of fresh infectious and toxic material, perhaps only to the perforation of the appendix, may be ascribed the exacerbation of the peritonitis, that is, a renewed attack which caused the death of the patient."

[The symptoms were those of intestinal putrefaction with local inflammation of the cecum and, as the history of the ease has pointed out, was located in that part of the cecum giving attachment to the appendix, for the autopsy showed that the appendix was surrounded by adhesions and imbedded in fecal pus. Please note particularly: The appendix was found in a pus cavity—a perityphlitic abscess. Why shouldn't the appendix be necrosed? Located in a field of inflammation, blown up, distended beyond its vital integrity; why should it not become gangrenous, It doesn't matter when the perforation of the appendix took place for it is quite evident that there was not enough disease of the appendix to cause its perforation until after it had become encased in the abscess cavity, and if the young man could have been freed from the treatment he received and could have been given the necessary rest the abscess cavity would have emptied itself, necrosed appendix and all, into the bowel and he would have made a perfect recovery.

"The point of rupture closed!" How could a rupture into a distended gut close, The distention was greater after the rupture than before. Fresh infection could not take place without a power to force the putrefaction greater than the force that existed before the abscess broke into the cecum. Let us reason together: Nature fought successfully against heavy odds before the rupture. There was gas distention of bowels interfering by pressure with the circulation and increasing the area of destruction of tissue; frequent retching and vomiting interfering by stretching and probably tearing, threatening disruption to the plastic process that was going on to close in the disorganizing and necrosing processes; the frequent examinations, and manipulations for diagnostic purposes, etc., but, in spite of all this opposition, fatal infection was successfully resisted; then, after the rupture and discharge, the relaxation, the calling off by nature of all her defenses, showed that the battle was won. All the defense yet left was the hard induration, "firm, flat resistance." This induration was quite sufficient to prevent reinfection, had there not been something out of the regular order to interfere. In this case there was a prostrated muscular system. The narcotic had left the patient without muscular power. The starchy food created gas, and the bowels, not having their natural tone, gave way to the gas until there was "Meteorism," not tympanites but meteorism which means to blow up or distend all that is possible.

Such a state as that means mechanical interference with every organ in the thoracic, abdominal and pelvic cavities, and, besides the pressure and interference in drainage and the blowing into the abscess cavity and into the pyogenic membrane gas loaded with infection, there was an almost fatal interference with the action of the heart and lungs. The prostrating effect on the muscular system of the septic or putrefactive poison was nothing to be compared to the paralyzing effect of opium. I believe this man would have survived every interference if the milk gruel had been left out, but acting as it did, it proved to be the last straw.]

"In regard to the fulminant symptoms at the onset of the disease, however, it is more likely that even then perforation had already occurred, and I that the final and fatal exacerbation was in consequence of adhesions formed in the first period which were powerless to resist the entrance of organisms producing inflammation. The pus finally broke through the adhesions, and produced diffuse peritonitis."

[It is a technical point unnecessary to raise whether the adhesions formed in the first or the last period; they were formed without question; I and if they were formed in the beginning, as doubtless they were, they withstood the most severe and trying period of their existence, which was before the abscess broke into the bowels, and so far as being able to resist to the very last, there has been no evidence to prove that the last infection was because of any lack of power of resistance on their part for the autopsy showed them intact. It is doubtful if anything but sound tissue could have withstood the strain that was put upon this man's diseased cecum from gas distention. The infection-laden gas could find a way anywhere in diseased tissue and broken continuity. Why should the pus break through the adhesions and find its way into the peritoneum after they had been able to make an effectual resistance till the bulk of it had forced a passage into the bowel? Why should the adhesions have less power to resist when there is less strain upon them and also a patent outlet for the pus? I fear our German friend of "Die Deutsche Klinik" had "booze" in his logic when he was explaining how his patient came to die.]

"Moreover, the bacterial finding of streptococci and cold bacilli in the perityphlitic abscess is typical, and the limitation of the diffuse peritonitis to areas below the omentum is also instructive. This simultaneously prevented the invasion of organisms producing inflammation into the serous surfaces above."

[There is nothing strange about this for nature works for the purpose of preventing "serous surface" invasion, and it takes a deal of malpractice to force such an infection. If nature's provisions against peritoneal inflammation were not as great as they are, few people with intestinal putrefactive diseases, from cholera infantum in babyhood to proctitis in old age, would get well, for most of the treatment for one and all of these diseases is obstructive rather than conservative and helpful.]

"This strong man, aged 31, had previously regarded himself as perfectly well. Nothing indicated the danger in which he found himself and which had existed since the appearance of the fecal calculus. the time when this had formed being impossible to determine. The disease appeared acutely with fulminant symptoms."

[He was, indeed, unfortunate, but his greatest misfortune, as I see it, was his treatment. Every acute disease is fulminant, even indigestion is fulminant, but the force of the warring elements is soon expended and unless reinforced by fresh elements the fulmination must end.

In diseases such as typhoid fever, appendicitis and typhlitis, we have first of all a constitutional derangement brought on by errors of life. The general resistance is lowered from nerve-exhausting habits; the general tone of digestion is below par and the bowel contents are maintaining a higher toxic state than usual; we have added to this condition an unusual tax in a long run of hot weather, business worries or unusual mental, physical or digestive strain, following which acute intestinal indigestion manifests with a sudden explosion; or there takes place a transformation of the contents of the bowels into an intense putrefaction which infects a portion of the mucosa that has been rendered susceptible by pressure from fecal impaction, concretions, or any cause capable of devitalizing. If the infection takes place in Peyer's patches, typhoid fever is the consequence; if the local trouble is of the cecum, typhlitis will result, and if the local devitalization is in the appendix, brought on from the irritating effects of a fecal calculus, appendicitis will result.

These diseases may start in a fulminant manner as suggested—with an acute intestinal indigestion, which will die down as soon as all the elements that combine to set off this fulmination l eve expended their force and unless fresh material be added everything must settle down to a local trouble. Or if the primary irritation is subjected to a light form of toxic infection the development of the disease will be much more insidious and will require much more time to come to its maturity, or its fulminating stage.

The reason for this is that each person has a cultivated immunity to a given toxic state of the intestinal contents, and when from pressure or the irritation caused by a calculus. there is a denudation of the mucosa the infection that takes place has not the power to arouse a systemic resistance' but can cause only a local inflammation; this inflammation may end in ulceration, or it may cause a thickening of the parts and interfere with drainage from mucous or glandular pockets; then the locked up secretions become intensely toxic, and this sets up a new infection much greater then l the first and powerful enough to cause the system to call out its militia to put down the rebellion. Now we have fulmination, but if food and drugs are withheld it ends soon.]

"Severe abdominal pain with tense abdominal walls, fever and vomiting form the characteristic triad in the first phase of the disease; less rapidly does meteorism appear. This depends upon whether the inflammation of the serosa quickly spreads or remains local. Peritoneal meteorism is peculiar. The abdomen is uniformly distended, balloon-like; the muscles as well as the rest of the abdominal walls are tense. It must be added, how ever, that in spite of the excruciating pain upon touch there is no sign of contraction of the abdominal muscles, of the "muscular resistance" (defense musculaire) which is so common on pressure in other forms of abdominal pain, particularly when circumscribed."

[Distention from any cause—or stretching of muscular fiber—causes paralysis for the time being.]

"The same is true of the diaphragm; it is forced upward, the muscles are therefore elongated and tense; but there is no evidence of active contractions. Abdominal respiration ceases; gradually then, as may be recognized by the limits of percussion, increasing loss of muscle tonus is added. In this case the autopsy showed that the peritonitis had not advanced up to the serosa of the diaphragm."

[The muscle tonus when a patient is under the influence of opiates cannot be reckoned with, for that drug paralyzes the muscles, and the bowels fill with gas as was seen in this case up to the day before the abscess ruptured; on that day feeding had been suspended, resulting in a decrease of gas and an amelioration of all the symptoms.]

"Among these signs pain, either spontaneous or upon touch, a rise in temperature, increased frequency of the pulse and, in general, the signs of severe illness, are to be looked upon as the local and general symptoms of a severe septic inflammation; vomiting, at least in the first stages of peritonitis, was due to decided reflex irritation of the numerous branches of the peritoneal nerves; the fecal discharges at the onset may be explained, but by no means invariably, as due to peristalsis acting reflexively. The constipation which followed this, however, as well as the meteorism, must be attributed to a hypotonia and paralysis of the musculature of the intestine by collateral edema."

[Beautiful sophistry. Words well woven together are captivating and frequently dethrone reason. If I didn't happen to know better I might really believe the author of this contribution to medical science knew exactly what he was talking about.

The constipation in such diseases as this is caused by the fixing, or natural resistance to motion, which is always to be found in diseases of tile bowels and is one of nature's conservative measures. The hypotonia or paralysis of the musculature was brought about by the opium; and it is certainly strange that educated men can build a symptom or condition by the administration of drugs and yet remain absolutely unconscious of the part they are playing, and proceed to build a beautiful theory explanatory of results.]

"The excessive abdominal pain, increased by movement and on the slightest pressure, caused the patient to remain motionless upon his back and to avoid the slightest movement of the abdomen either by speaking or coughing."

[This is a characteristic symptom when there is great distention of the bowels.]

"At the start the temperature was uniformly high, but later remissions in the pus fever were recognized."

[All fever would have disappeared had it not been that the intestinal putrefaction was kept alive by feeding.]

"The pulse from the onset was comparatively frequent, regular and somewhat tense.

"The vomitus was at first composed of the gastric contents, the bile of a peculiarly pure, grass-green, biliverdin color mixed with a yellowish chyme-like material, and in the later stages of the disease showed thin masses having a fecal odor (ileus paralyticus). In regard to the dejecta, the two passages at the onset of the disease pointed to increased peristalsis; this was of short duration, soon changing to the opposite condition, and until the rupture of the perityphlitic abscess absolute constipation existed."

[The vomiting would have gone to stay within three days if no drugs nor food had been given; as it was, when real vomiting ceased the opium nausea began.

This patient was not allowed to come into that state of peristaltic elimination that is due in all cases in three days at the farthest, and which would have come to this man if food and drugs had been withheld.]

"Pain upon urination and strangury was due to inflammation of the peritoneal coat of the bladder, in which a noticeable irritation was produced by slight distention as well as by contraction of the bladder. The albuminuria was the well known infectio-toxic 'febrile' form; indicanuria was in proportion to tile fecal stasis.

"In the course of the next few days a new symptom was added to this group: Exudation, which was demonstrable both by palpation and percussion. It was the natural consequence of inflammation of the peritoneum, and was both of diagnostic value as indicating general peritonitis and of special value in that, more definitely than the pain, it pointed to the original seat of the affection, which, according to present indications, could only have been an internal incarceration following right-sided inguinal hernia, or femoral hernia, or appendicitis. As neither the history nor the general status (normal condition of the hernial rings) furnished any points of support for the first view, only the diagnosis of appendicitis, that is, of perforation of the appendix, could be made with that degree of certainty attainable in diseases of the abdominal cavity in general.

"After the appearance of these symptoms, a more or less firmly adherent but limited perityphlitic abscess, and a less intense although well developed peritonitis in this region, were assumed; the latter, notwithstanding the painful meteorism, was not necessarily diffuse in the strict sense of the term; the omentum often protects the upper abdominal cavity from infection, as was proven in this case at the autopsy. It is possible that this diffuse peritonitis, which did not in the early period of the affection extend beyond the limited local focus, was not due to the intestinal contents and to bacteria, but chiefly to bacterial toxins which arose from the circumscribed original focus. This fact is pointed out by the prompt retrogression of the diffuse peritoneal symptoms after rupture of the abscess; the diffuse peritonitis of this stage might then be designated a nonbacterial 'chemical' inflammation, according to the terminology now in vogue; finally, it was positively a bacterial infection, although the postmortem finding of bacteria in the distant folds of the peritoneum is not proof of this; we know that during the terminal agony or after death these may wander a long distance from the perityphlitic focus."

[The author plays so fast and loose with the words, "diffuse peritonitis," that I am reminded of a remark made to me several years ago by a society lady who posed as a pace-setter in all matters pertaining to the intricacies of what one should and should not do. The subject was one that I did not know much about at that time, and upon which I am not much better informed at present. It was on diamonds. I complimented her on a very beautiful sunburst. She took the compliment modestly, of course. The center diamond was large and, I thought, of uncommon brilliancy, and I remarked, "That center stone properly mounted would make a very fine solitaire." She then informed me that she once owned a cluster of solitares.

The author tells us that at first the diffuse peritonitis probably did not extend beyond the local focus; this of course is exactly what I am contending for from first to last and I insist that there was not peritonitis proper until the occurrence of the fatal relapse.

It is somewhat surprising that this article should be selected to represent the last word on this subject, when the author builds his treatment upon diffuse peritonitis; then enters into a lengthy analysis and explanation of symptoms to fit the diagnosis and treatment and before he is through with the subject he declares that the diffusion is confined to the focus of infection.

If I did not know something of the worth of words I am not sure but such an excellent explanation might persuade me!! If I did not know from experience that all this is theory, beautiful theory, it might be very hard to resist!]

"After the symptoms of local and general inflammation with their secondary signs in the stomach and intestine had lasted for six days, suddenly a complete change took place: The nervous, anxious, extremely distressed patient became feeble and scarcely complained at all; his formerly congested face was pale and elongated, the nose pointed and cool; the skin lost its turgescence and warmth and was covered with a cold sweat; the bodily temperature also fell, the pulse became small and frequent but remained quite regular, the abdomen became softer and to a great extent lost its sensitiveness; the vomiting decreased to a few painless attacks,"

[Wholly due to the opium and morphine given]

"and singultus disappeared: A picture which, to a certain extent, is a combination of collapse and narcosis although not to the degree of profound loss of consciousness, being the picture of an intoxication in sharp contrast to the preceding febrile state."

[That is exactly what I stated above—a case of narcotism. How is it possible that the author, recognizing the narcotism, feels it incumbent to give other explanations?]

"Just as the affection had suddenly developed to its full height at the onset of the disease, and much more swiftly than, for example, is the case in phlegmon of the external walls, so with extraordinary rapidity did the clinical picture assume a new type. In this respect we must consider the very great area of the peritoneal folds, their numerous lymphstomata, and their intimate relation to the circulation, and we are impressed with the fact that fluids and solubles, as well as formed products, are rapidly absorbed by the peritoneum.

"Somewhat less rapidly than this, but nevertheless in the course of a few hours, another change took place, a favorable turn following the rupture of pus into the intestine. Here we were dealing with a well known and familiar phenomenon; if this occurs in the peritoneum the effects are particularly well marked; similarly as in the case of a phlegmon which rapidly disappears with the discharge of pus even although the inflammation extend beyond the pus focus, the symptoms of diffuse peritonitis promptly disappeared after the rupture. Very likely, as has already been stated, the symptoms of diffuse peritonitis in the first stages of the disease are to be referred to a chemical inflammation of the serosa, i. e., one due to toxins and without the ingress of bacteria; and it must be remembered that the clinical picture of this chemical peritonitis cannot be differentiated from that of the severe bacterial form. With the rupture of the abscess, the entrance of poisons into the free peritoneal cavity, and their resorption by the extensive peritoneal surfaces, as well as the vomiting and the intestinal paralysis, ceased. The taking of nourishment again be came possible.

"The point of rupture formed adhesions, the natural drainage of the peritoneal ichorous focus ceased, perhaps a new influx of inflammatory material from the perforated appendix also took; place. There was a fresh relapse of the local peritonitis which extended beyond the boundaries of the limiting adhesions, and permitted the invasion by bacteria of the free abdominal cavity. This, time the severe toxic picture of collapse immediately followed, and with marked decrease in cardiac strength led to death.

"Doubtless the patient might have been saved in the first stages of the disease by the evacuation of the abscess; the incision would at first have acted similarly to spontaneous rupture into the intestine, but the relapse would have been prevented by permanent drainage, and a radical cure might have been brought about by the immediate or subsequent removal of the appendix.

"Opium, no doubt, had a favorable effect upon the affection. By relieving intestinal irritability, and by bringing about a mild degree of narcosis, the patient was kept quiet and this materially assisted in limiting the severe perityphlitic suppuration in the first stage of the disease."

[All of which is positively not true, as I have witnessed for years.]

"If, as it unfortunately happened, the point of rupture had not immediately closed again, if it had remained open until suppuration ceased and contraction and healing of the perforated appendix had taken place, opium would have been regarded as instrumental in saving the patient, and unquestionably, at least to some extent, justly so. Among other factors in the treatment, the relief to the intestine by the suspension of nourishment was of paramount importance. The subcutaneous saline infusion had an obvious but, naturally, only a transitory effect."

The subcutaneous saline infusion is another ridiculous habit. It would really be amusing if it were not so tragic, to see patients driven to the edge of the great divide and then see the innocent doctor throw out an impotent life line.

The absolute innocence displayed by this professional man, from first to last, his belief in himself and the mechanism of his theory and practice exculpate him from the charge of carelessness, neglect of duty or even that he didn't know what he is doing. He does know what he is doing in a way. He works as exactly as a Waltham watch and he thinks about as much as the stem that winds the watch.

I cannot agree to the summing up of this case. There was not at any time, previous to the relapse and death of this patient, what we understand as peritonitis. A post-mortem examination might have shown the intra-peritoneal covering, of that portion of the cecum involved in the inflammation, slightly inflamed, but it is not reasonable to believe that the inflammation was of a toxic character unless adhesive inflammations can be so called.

Inflammation is always the same, it matters not what the exciting cause may be. It is an exaggerated physiological process. If there is inflammation of any part of the body it means that there is an exaggeration of function. Its intensity will be in keeping with the exciting cause. If the cause is intense heat or cold, or a corroding acid or alkali, the local action may be great enough to destroy the part; the inflammation following will be of the contiguous structure outside of the killing range of the cause, and it will be a simple—non-toxic—inflammation unless the secretions thrown out in excess of the reparative need are retained by dressings or prevented in some other way from draining away. If these secretions are kept bound on the raw surface by dressings until they decompose—yes, until the fermentation causes germs—the wound will become infected, and to what extent will depend upon the amount of malpractice—carelessness or ignorance—to which the case is subjected.

If the inflammation is caused by decomposition or a toxic agent, the extent of the process will depend upon the integrity of the part infected and the state of the general health, also upon the local environment—such as pressure interfering with the circulation of the blood.

In this fatal case there was the constitutional derangement and the toxic state of the alimentary canal; then there was the exciting cause, sufficient to create a local infection the symptoms of which were given at the beginning of this description, and which lasted for a few days; during which time the patient, no doubt, was eating and possibly taking home remedies to move the bowels, etc. These preliminary symptoms were followed by a severe pain in the right lower abdominal region, followed with chills, fever, nausea, vomiting and later by painful movements from the bowels, small in character, and soon after this distention of the bowels from gas.

During the few days of preliminary symptoms nature was going through the usual preparation of fixing the parts. The muscles were becoming rigid, which is one of nature's plans for protecting an inflamed part; the infection was striking deeper and arousing all the defenses. Possibly there had been a local inflammation of long standing, gradually degenerating into a fecal ulcer, which means that there was a spot of ulceration deep enough for fecal accumulation and the accumulation created fresh infection, which lighted up an active inflammation setting all the parts into defensive activity. The muscles of the abdomen—the bowels and all involved and contiguous parts—became set or fixed; and when this rigid state became established, the bowels below the cecum refused to receive the contents of the small intestine; hence when the peristaltic movement started at the head of the small intestine it found that an embargo had been laid on the cecum and lower bowels so that nothing could pass. This embargo took effect "about midday; he was seized with very severe pain." What was this pain? What is the pain that always attends obstruction of any kind? It is the desire for the bowels to move when they are unable, on account of the stoppage, to do so. Is there a reader who can't conceive of the terrible suffering that must come from such a state of the bowels, The pain is not from the spot inflamation, or ulceration, or the forming abscess, whichever is the exciting cause of all this trouble; for, if it wore, the pain would not stop in three days, or after the patient has been fasted long enough for the peristaltic movements to subside side. No, the local inflammation is not sufficient within itself to cause any more pain than this patient had the few days before he went to bed; it takes obstruction to bring suffering, and even obstruction will not cause pain per se, for this is proven in all cases rightly treated. As soon as the stomach and upper bowels are rested from food and drugs, all pain is gone and will never return unless the patient is badly handled.

In this case opium and morphine were given; this was very bad treatment, for these drugs always produce nausea and vomiting, exactly what was not desired because of the evil effect the retching had on the forming abscess. It is true that these cases frequently vomit the first three days after the obstruction, but there is practically no danger from retching that early in the disease. Again, the opium masked the case dreadfully; for it produced vomiting at that stage of the case when there should have been no trouble with the stomach at all, and induced a tympanites that was mistaken for the same state brought on by peritonitis.

In this case the doctor was in a mental mist from the beginning to the end; notwithstanding he was so confident that he knew all about his patient, that he has given the case a careful summing up so that it may be put with the medical classics.

The doctor is in error when he gives the name of "Acute, Diffuse Peritonitis." The case could not have been peritoneal perforation at the start, for the symptoms do not justify the diagnosis. A perforation causing diffuse peritonitis so early would have a higher pulse and temperature, and death would have followed within a few hours.

I can believe that there might have been an ulcer extending to the peritoneal covering, and this set up local peritonitis; but there was not at any time before the fatal relapse, a toxic inflammation within the peritoneal cavity; hence there was not diffuse peritonitis, and there could not have been without complete perforation which would have ended the case in death very soon.

In this case the point of infection was walled in, as all such cases are, with exudates and whether the appendix was primarily affected or not doesn't matter; it was within this enclosure and found to be ruptured, which is common; but its rupture was of no consequence because the escaped contents were in the abscess cavity that finally emptied into the cecum, the natural outlet in all these cases if they are left to nature and not officiously fingered—thumbed and punched to death.

The distinction drawn by this author between toxic and bacterial peritonitis is, to my mind, a distinction without a difference.

In this case the tympanites following the obstruction was due to the fact that the gas in the bowels was retained for a few days because of the completeness of the obstruction, and would have passed off in three days had it not been for the paralyzing effect of the opium; hence the distention that came from gas was succeeded by the distention peculiar to opium and caused the doctor to believe that he had a case of diffuse peritonitis when, in fact, he had a case of gas distention due to morphine paralysis. The morphine directly and indirectly weakened the heart. The distention of the bowels was a constant interference. The pulse at the start was fine at 112, but in six days it had increased to 140 and finally reached 160.



CHAPTER VIII



The following case comes to my mind, for some of the initial symptoms are similar to those of the case just described: M. B., age 42, farmer, was taken sick with the usual symptoms of appendicitis as near as I could get the history from his wife, who was his nurse. He lived twenty miles from Denver. When he was taken sick he called a local physician who treated him for bilious diarrhea. The drugs used, as near as the wife could remember, were small doses of calomel followed with salts to correct the I liver, morphine for pain, and bismuth and pepsin for digestion and diarrhea, and quinine to break the fever; also hot applications on the bowels.

The pain was so great that morphine had been given quite freely. At the end of one week the sick man, being no better, declared that he would go to Denver and consult another physician. When he told his physician what his intentions were, the doctor advised him not to attempt the trip himself, for he was too sick, but to send for the physician. The sick man was willful and forceful, and he was also afraid of the cost; and, being a plucky fellow, he declared that he could go just as well as not and that he would and he did.

His wife was a large, strong woman and gave him valuable assistance, but I never have understood how it was possible for so sick a man to make the journey from his home to my office. He was obliged to help himself a great deal in climbing in and out of ordinary conveyances to reach the train and, when in Denver, with his wife's assistance, he walked a half block to the street car; then from the car to my office he was obliged to walk one block and at last climb one flight of stairs. When they came into my office the wife was almost carrying him. I saw at a glance that he was a desperately sick man, and before I attempted to examine him I had him lie down for a while.

He had no history of any previous sickness; he had always been very healthy, and his life had been spent in hard work in the open air.

The general appearance of the man was that of one suffering from diffuse peritonitis. The abdomen was enormously distended; this symptom more than any other caused me to fear and wonder—fear that rupture would take place before he could be put to bed, and wonder how it was possible for a man to be out of bed and go through what he had gone through that morning without causing a fatal injury of some kind. The distention, I was informed, had been gradually coming on from the first, and he had been given morphine to control the pain from the first day of his illness. When they gave me this information I knew that the tympanites was due to narcotic paralysis, instead of coming from perforative, septic peritonitis, as the general appearance and symptoms indicated. This reasoning gave me hope in spite of the formidable appearance of the case.

The pulse was 130, temperature 102 degree F., in the forenoon; he had been troubled with nausea a great deal, but with the exception of one or two vomiting spells, the first and second day, the nausea did not often cause retching. The mouth and lips were dry, tongue coated, bad taste in mouth and breath very offensive.

The reason there had not been more vomiting in this case was because there was diarrhea at first and not quite so much locked up fecal matter as common. The bowels had been relieved of the usual accumulation more than is common to the majority of such diseases before the swelling and fixation had become established.

There is a small percentage of people who are not quite so irritable as others; in these the contraction, constriction or fixation—the embargo laid on these parts by nature in her conservative effort at preventing movement—is not established quite so early, and the efforts on the part of doctors to force a movement are more successful in cleaning out a part of the accumulation; or there may come a diarrhea from the putrefactive poisoning which is causing the infection of the cecum or appendix and leading to abscess, and this causes a partial cleaning out before fixation is established; in these cases there is never so much vomiting nor nausea, neither do they suffer so much pain for there is not the usual accumulation in the alimentary canal to excite the peristaltic movement.

The history that the patient and his wife gave me from memory was that the urine had been scant, and at times painful to pass. There had been from the start severe pain in the lower bowels, but neither the patient nor his wife could remember if there had been more pain on right, lower frontal region than anywhere else; they both declared that the pain was all through the bowels and that there was much bearing down like unto the pain of a diarrhea.

Breathing was shallow, of course; it never is otherwise in severe abdominal distention.

I scarcely touched the abdomen, for I knew I dare not press, in percussing, enough to distinguish any sound except the tympanitic. It has never been my custom to allow my curiosity to run away with my judgment, and cause me to make needless examinations.

All examinations are needless when, it matters not what the diagnosis can or must be, the treatment will be the same. All possible bowel troubles which present the same general symptoms of the disease I am here describing, must receive a like general treatment. This being true, it matters not what the difference is, there cannot be a variation requiring a bimanual examination to differentiate it that will justify the risk. All examinations are needless and criminal when there is a possibility of rupturing an abscess. Especially is this true when it is a positive fact that all typhlitic and appendicular abscesses will open into the bowels if allowed to do so.

In this ease I reasoned as follows: This must be a case of abscess, for the signs of obstruction are not those of complete obstruction, such as are seen in hernias, volvulus, constricting bands and many other causes not necessary to mention. If there were complete obstruction there would be increasing nausea and vomiting, ending in collapse and death. This tympanites cannot be from peritonitis for perforation would be necessary to cause it and nothing would stop the progress after it had once started except to open the cavity wash and drain. Hence this cannot be peritonitis, for there has been no operation and the patient still lives. It can be distention from the effects of morphine, but there must be more than morphine paralysis, for there is a temperature of 102 degree to 103 degree F., and there has been, so the wife says, a temperature of 104 degree F. The pulse rate being 130 does not indicate fever nor exhaustion, and is not in keeping with the temperature nor physical strength, hence the rapidity must be partly due to pressure on the diaphragm from the gas distention and partly from the paralyzing effect that opium has on the heart.

The professional reader will see that I have by my analysis eliminated much of the formidableness that the physical appearance gives to this case, but I would not have you believe that this man was not a desperately sick man even if I have accounted for the dangerous symptoms. The fact is, if the pronounced symptoms had been what they appeared to be, the man would have been saved his trip to me, for he would have been dead.

The farmer had learned from experience that the less he put in his stomach the better he felt; hence, for a day or two before he left his home to consult me, he had refused food and drugs and had taken very little water.

After giving the sick man a rest in my office I had his wife take him to the home of a friend with whom they had arranged to stay while in the city. In a few hours I visited him and made the following prescriptions and proscriptions: Positively no food, not one teaspoonful of anything except water. An enema of half a gallon of tepid water to be used once each day for the purpose of clearing out the bowels below the constriction, and I advised against violence—rough handling. A hot water jug to the feet, fee to the abdomen, all the fresh air possible in his bedroom and absolute quiet. If nauseated, enough water to control thirst was to be used by enema; if the stomach was all right all the water desired by mouth.

I called the second day; the patient had slept some—he thought about three hours of broken rest—feeling fairly comfortable; pulse 120, temperature 101 degree F. at 9:00 a.m.; 102 degree F. at 5:00 p. m. Third day: Temperature 100 degree F. at 9:00 a. m.; 101 degree F. at 5:00 p. m.; one-third of the tympanites gone; slept six hours; hungry and demanding food. I said, "No, you get no food until the bowels move." The ice was taken off the bowels; hot cloths were substituted.

The fourth day the temperature in the morning was 100 degree F.; in the afternoon 101 degree F., pulse 100; slept well, hungry, bowel distention reduced fifty per cent. I touched him very lightly and found enough to confirm my diagnosis of typhlitic abscess; this was the first time I had felt that I was justified in attempting to confirm my suspicions, and even this examination could not be called a palpation, for I put no weight upon the abdomen. The patient was very dissatisfied because I would not allow him food. I said, "No. you can't eat until your bowels move." "How soon will they move!" he asked in an irritating and ungracious manner, to which I replied, "Your God only knows, and He won't tell."

Fifth day about the same, a little better; very ugly because I would not allow him food. He said: "I don't believe there is anything the matter with me; you are holding me down."

Sixth day about the same, feeling fine, sleeping fine and starving to death. He made himself so unpleasant by his clamoring for food that I permitted his wife to give him a half dozen Tokay grapes. He had scarcely swallowed the sixth when he had all the pain he wanted. His wife came to my office in great excitement: "Doctor, please come at once to see my husband; he is much worse, he is in agony with his bowels." My answer was: "Go back and renew your hot applications to the bowels and tell your husband I permitted him to eat the grapes because he had been so unkind and ungrateful for the comfort that had been given him; tell him that I knew the grapes would give him pain and that the pain will not wear off entirely for twelve hours, and that I will not see him before tomorrow morning."

I called as I agreed to do the next day, the seventh day since the case came under my management, and the fourteenth day from the beginning of the disease. The sick man was out of humor. To my question, "Would you like something to eat!" he drawled, "Na-a-aw! I never intend to eat any more; but I would like to know when my bowels are going to move." Of course I could not tell him any more than I had told him before, namely, that under such circumstances they usually require from fourteen to twenty-eight days.

From this time on every day was much the same; no elevation in temperature, and the pulse ranged from eighty to occasionally one hundred; no pain, sleep good, that is, as good as people generally sleep who are on a continuous fast—under a continuous fast the sleep is good but not heavy nor long at a time.

It is a fact that when these cases are properly handled they are not sick after the first week; they do not look sick; they get to thinking that it is folly to stay in bed and live without food, and of course their neighbors know that there isn't anything the matter with them; that the doctor is starving them to death. Quite a number of my patients have brought themselves near death's door from disobeying instructions and taking the advice of knowing neighbors. They were persuaded to "eat"—"eat all you want, for the doctor will not know it."

This is one disease that will give the disloyalty of the patient away every time.

On the morning of the nineteenth day of his sickness, and the twelfth day of my services, I called to see the sick man, and before I could ask him a question he shot out his hand toward me and exclaimed, "My bowels moved at four o'clock this morning! I want a beefsteak for my breakfast!" I congratulated him on his fine condition and ordered him a dish of mutton broth. This disgusted him thoroughly, and his reply was in kind: "A dish of broth! After fasting two days on my own prescription, and then twelve days on yours, I am to be rewarded with a dish of broth." I explained that he had a large abscess cavity that would require several days to empty, collapse and draw together, and if he should eat solid foods too soon he would run the risk of cultivating chronic appendicitis—recurring appendicitis. I advised him to live on liquid foods for three or four days, and after that he could have solid foods if he would practice thorough mastication.

The action from the bowels had been saved for me; there was an ordinary chamber half full; it looked to me like at least a half gallon of fecal matter, pus and blood; it was dreadfully offensive. Six hours after the first movement I was informed that he had another movement very similar in quantity and consistency; this movement I did not see, for I did not visit the man after the morning of the nineteenth. He left for his home on the morning of the twenty-third and has had excellent health ever since.

If this man had been subjected to daily examinations food and drugs, would he have presented the same symptoms! Indeed the tympanites alone would have killed him. Was his case diffuse peritonitis? No! For if there had been intra-peritoneal infection in the first place, it would have indicated perforation, and then, without the opening up of the peritoneal cavity, washing and draining, there would have been a funeral.

The following is a similar case except that the woman came into my hands the first day of her sickness. Her symptoms were: Nausea, vomiting and pain all over the bowels as she said—as much pain in one place as another—temperature 102 degree F., which ran up to 103 degree F. in the p. m.; pulse 110, and a history of constipation. She had several movements from the bowels through the night before I was called in the morning. The movements were small and accompanied with much griping; the patient said that if she could have a good cleaning out of the bowels she felt that she would be well. I informed her that she had appendicitis and that she would be compelled to remain very quiet in bed, with ice applied locally until the temperature was reduced to 101 degree F., or less, and then substitute hot applications. For the pain I had her stay in the hot bath until relieved, and when the pain returned she was to go to the bath again. The bath water was ordered to be used as hot as possible. Every night an enema of warm water. The treatment did not vary from the farmer's and the results were the same—her bowels moved on the nineteenth day; the consistency and amount were about the same, and I had her exercise care about her eating for a week after the abscess discharged. From the end of the first week of her sickness until the abscess broke she expressed herself freely that she did not believe there was anything the matter, and that going without food when one felt well was foolish; however, she obeyed and had no suffering.

A son of the woman whose case I have reported above was taken down the same way one year after. I explained the situation and told the young man that he must keep quiet and go without food just as his mother did the year before. I did not think it necessary to visit him very often, for he knew how his mother was treated, besides she was with him to advise.

Within three days he was comfortable, and remained so until about the seventh or eighth day, when he decided he would take a glass of milk and not say anything to me about it. He took the milk and was writhing in pain within two hours. I was sent for, and of course asked what he had eaten, whereupon he told me that he had taken milk. Within twenty-four hours he was easy and cured of his desire to eat until ready for it. This case terminated by rupture of the abscess on the fifteenth day.

Neither of these cases had any tympanites worth mentioning. All cases that I have ever seen with great bowel distention are those coming into my care after being subjected to the usual feeding and medicating.

Now we will go over Dr. Vierordt's case in connection with mine and see if his case of diffuse peritonitis is not about as near like my case as it is possible to have two cases.

His patient was a merchant 31 years old, mine a farmer 42 years old. There is a difference in these two men, caused by their occupations. The merchant could not have made the trip to my office as did the farmer, for several reasons: First, merchants are pampered; they are not used to discomfort; they are not used to waiting upon themselves as country men are. When they are sick they send for the doctor; the farmer goes to the doctor. The merchant has learned the habit of spending his money and the farmer has learned the habit of saving his, and perhaps that one statement is enough for the discerning.

The merchant was too sick to make such a trip and he knew it. The farmer was too sick to make the trip and he didn't know it. This is the vital difference between these two cases.

The merchant was tympanitic from the first day of his prostration, which is not usual. On the fourth day his temperature was 104 degree F., pulse 120 to 136, mind clear but anxious. His lesser symptoms were about like the farmer's, with the exception that the merchant had been given more narcotics and presented more of the dorsal decubitus than the farmer. Laymen, the plain everyday meaning of dorsal decubitus is lying on the back. In low forms of disease it is looked upon as an unfavorable symptom. Where much morphine has been given it denotes prostration peculiar to the drug. My patient was on his back for several days, because it is impossible for a patient to stay on either side while suffering from severe tympanites.

On the sixth day the merchant's pulse was 140 and the temperature 101.3 degree F., which proves, if nothing else does, that he did not have diffuse peritonitis, for it is impossible for a patient to have acute, diffuse peritonitis, be drugged and fed, and go through the daily physical examinations such as he was put through, and on the day before the abscess breaks into the bowels show a temperature of 101.3 degree F. The pulse counts for nothing in such a case as this; I did not look upon the farmer's pulse as indicative of any serious state, for I knew the opium had caused it. If the pulse of either the merchant or the farmer had been due to peritonitis death would have ended either one before his abscess had broken. In fact diffuse peritonitis comes from perforation with discharge of the abscess contents into the peritoneal cavity, and it always spells death.

When vomiting recurs, or continues after the third day, there is malpractice, or there is a serious complication, or there is a mistaken diagnosis.

It is well to get this one fact well in mind, namely, appendicular and typhlitic abscesses are not accompanied with complete obstruction; hence, when the symptoms are so profound as to point to absolute obstruction, no delay should be made in having the abdomen opened and the obstruction, whatever it is, should be removed at once.

The fact that the bowels do not move in from twelve to twenty-one days should not be looked upon as total obstruction. What obstruction there is is due to fixation of the parts and is truly a physiological rest—it is on the order of the fixation of an inflamed joint—the joint appears to be anchylosed, but as soon as the pain is gone it becomes as movable as ever.

Again, if the case is really obstruction it will grow worse daily even if my plan of treatment—absolute rest from everything—is carried out to the letter.

There is not any danger of the abscess opening anywhere except into the bowels, for that is in the line of least resistance and, if it fails to do so, it is because it is badly managed.



CHAPTER IX



I have appendicitis; what shall I do to be saved? Don't eat anything until well. Use a stomach tube and wash out the stomach; then use a fountain syringe and wash out the bowels; take a hot bath as hot as can be borne, and stay in the tub until all the pain is gone, or as long as possible; then go to bed, put ice on the bowels and keep it on until the temperature is reduced to 101 degree F., then apply hot applications or poultices and continue the poulticing until the bowels move, and the bowels will not move until the abscess breaks.

Use an enema every night as a routine, and drink all the water desired, when there is no nausea.

Don't manipulate the forming abscess, nor allow anyone else to do so.

If you are really in doubt about what you have, think over what I have written about strangulation or positive obstruction, and if you think you have it, send for the best physician you know and get his opinion of whether you have obstruction or not, but don't allow him to burst an abscess with his manipulations! For, my word for it, if he can't weigh symptoms and tell whether or not you have complete obstruction without punching holes in you with his bimanual manipulation, neither would he be able to do so after examining you.

I do not say this because I like to make it hard for doctors, but I prefer staying the heavy hand of the doctor to keeping still and allowing him unwittingly to kill his patient.

First of all wash the stomach out with a siphon tube, then see to it that nothing but water goes into the stomach until the bowels move.

I put my cases on a complete fast, give no drugs, apply ice to the region of the appendix, keep the feet warm, and keep the patient in an atmosphere of hope and belief in his recovery, and a recovery always follows. I prescribe an enema of warm water once or twice daily, getting all the water possible into the bowels.

These patients are so comfortable after the second or third day that it is hard to make them or their friends believe that they have appendicitis People are so afraid that they will starve to death if they have no food for a few days that they make haste to get put on a killing treatment rather than run any risk. This fear is absurd Physicians are largely to blame for this popular ear, for those who do not feed by mouth still have the idea that their patients must have nourishment, so they feed by rectum. This is also absurd. What the patient needs is rest, and the more complete the rest the quicker the recovery. Give the patient all the water he wants.

The bowels will move in fourteen to twenty eight days from the beginning of the attack. Then the fast can be broken by giving a glass of hot milk, which is to be chewed well, or given in the form of junket; this is to be repeated three times a day for a week, or give the milk twice a day and a plate of mutton broth for the third meal. I do not give solid food because there is a large abscess cavity opening into the bowels, and if solid food is given before it has time to close, it is liable to find its way into this cavity, thereby preventing healing, and bringing on a chronic condition that will ultimately end in death. The less food taken for one week after the discharge takes place, the better. Any rational individual should see that withholding food is the proper treatment. Milk should be thoroughly mixed with saliva or not taken at all. Remember that if milk is not taken with great deliberation, and great care given to thoroughly insalivate each sip, then it amounts to the same thing as eating solid food.

Milk is a solid food when taken into the stomach as a beverage or a drink like water.

In appendicitis all nature cries out for rest, and if it is given 99 out of every 100 cases will get well and there will be no suffering and no danger after the first seventy-two hours.

The ordinary physician sends for a surgeon, and if he is a victim of the surgical mania the patient must be operated upon at once, for if twelve or twenty-four hours are given, the conditions may clear up and an operation will be unnecessary. The majority of surgeons feel that they will forfeit their right to heaven if they do not cut at once. The consequence is that there are many patients operated upon who are as innocent of having the disease as the surgeon is innocent of a knowledge of a better plan of treatment.

Of course, the surgeon declares that pus should be let out by cutting into it, or it is liable to break into the peritoneal cavity and cause death This is positively not the truth, for when an abscess threatens, nature at once proceeds to throw a wall around in order to avoid accidents. All around the point of prospective abscesses, heavy walls of adhesions are built, and if nature is not interfered with, the abscess will break into the gut, because it is the point of least resistance, and it is also the point favored by gravity. The surgeons when they operate in these cases work exactly opposite to nature.

If these abscesses are allowed to open into the bowel and solid food is kept away from the patient, full and uncomplicated recovery will take place. If solid food is given too soon it is liable to find its way into the abscess cavity and cause a blind fistula, which may take on acute inflammation at any time. These cases then become chronic and are called recurring appendicitis. It is sound surgery, in dealing with abscesses, to find, if possible, the direction nature is taking to evacuate pus and be guided by this suggestion in evacuating a pus cavity.

In order to cure appendicitis you must remove the cause. Cutting off the appendix, opening an abscess, withholding food till the acute symptoms have passed; such treatment is not removing the cause. Nothing short of changing the eating habits of the patient will cure, so the surgeon who knows nothing about food and its action—what part improper eating has to do with bringing on the disease—will never be able to cure.

Operating for this disease will fall into disrepute in time, for there are already cases recurring and the second and third operation will be necessary among those who survived the first. There is not a scintilla of logical reasoning in defense of the operation. Because some get well after an operation is no proof that the operation was necessary; fortunately for the operator there is no way to prove that the case operated upon would have recovered without the operation. If the case be not complicated by bungling treatment an operation is uncalled for. If a case has been medicated and fed to death—abused to the extent of causing a rupture into the peritoneal cavity—surgery must be resorted to as the only hope.

If a case survive an operation the patient is no wiser than he was before, and knows nothing about avoiding another attack, for let it be said loud enough to be heard by all, and with no fear of successful contradiction, that if every child at birth should have the appendix removed there would not be one case less of appendicitis than there is with the appendix intact. Of course, technically there could be no appendicitis without an appendix, but the cecum would become inflamed just as readily.

No amount of forcing drugs given by the mouth can induce a movement from above the constriction, but a great amount of pain can be produced by attempting to force a passage. No one comprehending the true state of affairs would be foolhardy enough to try to force the bowels to move. The reader can readily imagine the great pain and danger liable to follow cathartic drugs, for they stimulate severe peristaltic contractions. The contractions drive the contents of the small intestine against the inflamed cut-off, but there it must stop. If the parts have become softened, which they do by the inflammation, there is danger of perforation and an escape of the contents of the bowels into the peritoneal cavity, after which diffuse peritonitis and death follow. Surgery can hardly hope to save such patients; in fact they usually die; this is why the surgeon recommends an early operation.

If all cases are to be so abused and if there were no better way to treat them I also should say, operate at once as soon as the disease is discovered; but I know from years of experience that there is a better way to care for these patients.



CHAPTER X



Allow me to repeat: As soon as a case is diagnosed the proper treatment is to stop all medicine and food, for they excite movement, and this should be avoided. Give nothing but water. Keep ice over the inflamed spot. Keep the patient quiet, end the feet warm. There is absolutely nothing to be done until the bowels move, which will take place in from fourteen to twenty-eight days. The patient will not starve to death, nor will there be any danger that the abscess will open anywhere except into the bowels. After the bowels move, one glass of hot milk is to be given three times a day, so there will be no danger of solid food finding its way into the cavity of the abscess.

To be safe I insist on a fluid diet for a week after the bowels move, and a light diet for two or three weeks more. Cases taken through in this way, and then instructed in never allowing the bowels to become loaded again, will not only make a good recovery, but there is no tendency for the disease to return if the patient is prudent. I say that there need not be a death from this disease if these suggestions are properly carried out. The cases that die every year are killed by food and medicine.

Surgery has gained its reputation in these cases because of the stupidity of the average physician and patient. Cases taken through in this way are comparatively comfortable; they may pretend to suffer from hunger, but it is principally imagination. If my plan were generally adopted the dread of this disease would disappear; surgeons would get left on some fat fees, and the undertaker would look glum after the fall crop.

There are a few laymen so willful and incorrigible that they can't be depended upon to follow instructions. They will break rules, be imprudent in eating, and in many ways disregard their own interests. Such cases should be sent to the surgeons as early as possible, before they have time to complicate their disease and make a complete recovery impossible; however, people with such temperaments usually find an early grave and they might as well go by the surgical route as any other.

THE END