A contribution to the theory of diathesis / by David J. Brakenridge.

  • Brakenridge, David J. (David James), 1839-1895.
Date:
1869
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: A contribution to the theory of diathesis / by David J. Brakenridge. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    8/24 (page 8)
    a the Production of Tuberculosis ” (“ Medical Times and Gazette,” June 1868), I have endeavoured to show that the organs of digestion undergo a similar development in nature and degree proportioned to their exercise, a special education being required for every decidedly different substance. Without such a training, the power to nicely adjust a most complex process to the necessities of each case would be wanting, and perfect digestion of any sub¬ stance would be impossible, although the necessary organs remained quite free from actual disease—-just as the hand and eye of the musician, however perfect anatomically and physiologically, are quite incapable of transferring a diffi¬ cult piece of music from the paper to the instrument, without a power to do so, acquired by long and steady practice, existing in them and in their presiding nerve centres. So special is this education that the training necessary for one fat or oil does not serve for all substances of the same class. Each requires a special modification of the powers ; hence, as is well known, one form of fat or oil can often be taken when the others are rejected. Many phenomena connected with disease appear to me to come under this law, such as restoration to apparent health after the loss of part of an important organ. “ If one kidney,” writes Sir Thomas Watson, “ wastes, or is spoiled by disease, an increase of function devolves upon the other, and, by a beautiful law of compensation, the sound organ, without any alteration of its peculiar fabric, enlarges. The same is observed to be the case with the Jungs.” I do not, however, think that this enlarge¬ ment—although it is undoubtedly an earJy result of suddenly increased function—sufficiently accounts for recovery in such cases. The following appears to me to be the most satisfactory explanation :—All organs of the body being capable of an almost unlimited amount of