A review of the arguments for and against the contagious nature of cholera morbus / by James Hutchinson.

Date:
1832
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: A review of the arguments for and against the contagious nature of cholera morbus / by James Hutchinson. Source: Wellcome Collection.

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

    5/20 (page 3)
    duce proofs, sufficiently satisfactory to an unprejudiced mind, that the grand epidemic Cholera of 1817-18, was decidedly of that character. Before entering on these proofs, however, it may be as well to offer a few preliminary observations, witli the view of clearing the ground of controversy of any difficulties, which would unnecessarily distract the attention of the reader, at a time when the concentrated powers of the mind are required for a clear view of the different bearings of the evi- dence. Were Cholera Morbus obviously contagious, it would be unnecessary for me to trespass on the attention of the public, on the present occa- sion ; we can only then, it appears, in the course of our inquiry, ration- ally expect to discover the minor shades of that character. The profession, and the public generally, appear to me, hitherto, to have been led astray in the investigation, by two important sources of eiror. Tliey have too commonly arrayed the evidence for and against the contagious character of the disease, fairly against each other, as if they were of equal value, and have totally forgotten that, on one side, the proof is of a positive, and on the other, merely of a negative nature, and that one single positive proof, must instantly invalidate a whole chain of evidence, however apparently satisfactory, if merely negative. Thus, if a single person enter the chamber of a patient la- bouring under typhus, and actually catch the disorder, it is a strong proof of its infectious character; although thirty other persons may follow and escape with impunity. Again, those who oppose the doctrine of contagion, have too often, with a blind perverseness, attributed, or argued as if they attributed to the supporters of the opposite theory, the belief that the disease is pro- pagated by that influence alone; but this is, in reality, far from being the case ; for the generality of those who believe in its contagious na- ture, at the same time, fully admit its propagation, by epidemic influ- ence; and, in my opinion, by the admission alone, of this double pow- er of extending its ravages, can the phenomena of Cholera Morbus be adequately accounted for. What the precise nature of that influence may be, it would be pre- mature to inquire, at this stage of our progress. It may be permitted me, however, to remark, with the view of enabling the reader to follow the train of reasoning employed, that the experience of all ages has con- curred in attributing it to a peculiar state of the atmosphere, and in supposing, that the deviation from its usual state, is, in general, more widely diffused than the malaria or local poison, which engenders en- demic disorders. We have a little more difficult task to perform, in sifting the various and conflicting testimonies on the subject, and ascertaining their real value. At times when the public mind is in a state of agitation and alarm, there are not wanting impostors, who for the sake of a little briet notoriety, give publicity to statements which are entirely false; others again observe, and faithfully record, what they have seen; but* with precipitate haste, attribute effects to certain causes, which, however may be far irorn being the true ones; and finally, occasionally certain