Remarks relative to Dr. Paine's commentaries upon the writings of M. Louis / by H. I. B.

  • Bowditch, Henry I. (Henry Ingersoll), 1808-1892.
Date:
1840
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Remarks relative to Dr. Paine's commentaries upon the writings of M. Louis / by H. I. B. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by Royal College of Physicians, London. The original may be consulted at Royal College of Physicians, London.

    5/32 (page 5)
    one or two cases, we think it very strange that Dr. P. should not merely draw an inference from one case in regard to the effect of bleeding upon pneumonia, but likewise that the same influence is exerted upon “ many cases of inflammatory affections.” We really cannot see any proof of the truth of this proposition, though Dr. P. of course expects us to take his assertions, as he kindly consents to take Dr. Hale’s assertion for the truth of the results of 197 cases. (Vol. 2, page 690.) Again, how does he know that Dr. Hall’s views are wrong ? Has he tried Dr. H.’s plan and found it wanting ? If so, let us know the number of his facts pro and con—for we are unwilling to take the assertion of any man. We may make the same remark in reference to his cases in which death occurred from want of care in bleeding. We want to see some of his cases, in order that we may compare them with some in which bleeding was omitted, or “perhaps used inefficiently,” and yet the pa- tients recovered. We would not, however, have any one suppose that we disapprove of venesection in inflammatory diseases. Far from it. Our own experience, even if Louis’s cases did not prove it, would con- vince us that this remedy has very great influence in alleviating the general symptoms of inflammatory diseases of the chest. But we have never seen an acute inflammation “ strangled ” by it. Again. The tongue, that favorite organ for doctors to look wise over, and therefrom divine the state of the system, becomes next the source of trouble, because, forsooth, according to Dr. Paine, Louis says that the indications to be drawn from the state of the tongue are “ the least important ” of any. (Vol. 1, Fevers, page 238.) But we beg the reader to mark well, though this is but the commencement of misstate- ments, Louis never stated this, that we can find, in his work on typhus, or in fact in any of his w'orks, so far as w’e can discover. He states, and to our mind, proves, that there is no necessary connection between the condition of the tongue and that of the stomach (Vol. 2, page 55 to 90) ; but that certain secondary lesions are consequent upon any fe- brile excitement, and lesions of the tongue are among them. Louis never even said that the indications from the tongue were unimportant, but merely that from the tongue alone we cannot infer so much as is usually supposed, in regard to the general system, and that it does not indicate the condition of the stomach. The next remark we have to notice, is this:—(Vol. 1, p. 282) “ We shall see that Mons. Louis and his followers have little or no con- fidence in the curative effects of bloodletting in pneumonia, and some other equally severe inflammations.” Let us see how the facts stand.