An analytical inquiry into the specifick property of mercury, relating to the cure of venereal diseases. Wherein is explained, I. The nature ... and choice of preparations. II. The necessary cautions ... III. The true generation and nature of the virus. IV. The variety of its symptoms in different climates ... V. The ill consequences of a bad practice ... VI. An answer is given to several objections ... VII. Dr. Chicanneau's method of curing this distemper without salivation is vindicated ... / [Vincent Brest].

  • Brest, Vincent
Date:
1732
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: An analytical inquiry into the specifick property of mercury, relating to the cure of venereal diseases. Wherein is explained, I. The nature ... and choice of preparations. II. The necessary cautions ... III. The true generation and nature of the virus. IV. The variety of its symptoms in different climates ... V. The ill consequences of a bad practice ... VI. An answer is given to several objections ... VII. Dr. Chicanneau's method of curing this distemper without salivation is vindicated ... / [Vincent Brest]. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    22/48 (page 10)
    it; may evacuate itfelf, and the Virus along with it, by Sweating and Urine, in the room of the Evacu- ations by Salivation. This is what I have to demon- ftrate. And that I may do it with an order fuitable to the Subject, it will not be amifs to remove firft the conceited Opinions of liich Practitioners, as have already exclaimed againft this new Method of Cur- ing, and endeavour to anfwer their feveral objecti- ons. The firft Objection, that appeared on this Ho- rizon, againft Dr. Cbicanneau, in relation to his cur- ing forty Perfcns of the Pox without Salivation, was, that none of them had the Symptoms of it ; that Mr. Palmer an eminent Surgeon had cured one of the Pa- tients, who milcarried by Dr. Chic mine aVs new Me- thod, In Anfwer to the firft Objection, Every body knows, that the denial of a thing, is not a proof that the thing is, or is not: Dr. Cbicanneau is one of the worthieft Practitioners in Phyfick throughout France, and incapable to advance liich falfhood. In Anfwer to the lecond Objection. Tho5 we luppofe in the Curing forty Patients by that Method one had mil- carried, I think it is not a fiibftantial realbn why the Method fhould be good for nothing, when by that of Salivation, the Practitioners here Mifcarry, at leaft one in four. Further Dr. Cbicanneau wrote his relation in Latin, and the Objection againft it was written in Engltfh, a Language unknown to the laid Gentleman. Some years after the laid Objecti- on, Dr. C an eminent Phyfician, and many other Practitioners befides him, pretended to have tryed here that Montpellier Method ; and laid, that it would not anfwer the intent of a Cure, becaufe of the difference of the Climate. This amounts to no more, then a ConfelBon, that they have failed in this method of Practice; for if they knew the Method as well as I do, they would not mifcarry in the Cure of their Patients, while I can prove, that I have cured here