can not distinguish between the femur and the vomer and who has not the slightest idea of medicine, should push himself into one of the highest positions of the American Medical Association, and should then sail under false colors, making the profession believe that he is a physician, when as a matter of fact he is not? Certainly we have a right to demand that members of the Council. at least should be free from any tinge of chicanery, misrepresentation and fraud.

"Never Told Tales" Again.

We presume that for some time to come we shall be obliged to refer to and to answer the various criticisms made on Never Told Tales.* In the last issue we effectually disposed of one criticism; so effectually, that the maker of the criticism wrote us, that he felt he was in the wrong and we were in the right. This month (March) the American Journal of Clinical Medicine reviews the book in an editorial, and reviews it very favorably. The reviewer objects, however, very decidedly to one chapter, the chapter which deals with the prevention of conception problem. "I do not believe in the prevention of conception," says the editor of Clinical Medicine. Well, everybody is entitled to his belief, and we can be very friendly with people holding beliefs which are diametrically opposed to ours-provided they are tolerant. But we most decidedly do believe in the prevention of conception, when such prevention is either necessary or simply desirable, and as we have said many times before, the voluntary regulation of reproduction (this is a nicer term than "prevention of conception") is the most important problem which at the present time confronts the human race. If the mass of the people (and not only the rich who are not in much need of it) possessed the knowledge of the proper means of limitation of offspring, half of this world's misery would at once disappear. We stand unalterably for teaching the people the proper means of prevention of conception; and in order to make such teaching permissible, we must influence public opinion, we must consider the story to which the editor of Clinical Medicine objects not only unobjectionable, but the most useful story in the book.

With all due modesty, we believe that we are doing some useful work in this world. We believe we have some influence in molding public opinion in the direction of independent thinking, in the direction of tolerance, broad-mindedness and freedom. But of all reformatory efforts, we believe that our advocacy of the necessity of teaching the people how to regulate the number of their offspring, so that they can have children when they want and only as many as they want, is our most important and most fruit-bearing endeavor.

*Published by THE ALTRURIANS, 12 Mt. Morris Park W., New York. $1.00.

Lecithin to Repair the Damage Done by Anesthetics.

In this editorial note I beg to present a point for the consideration of the medical profession, which seems to me of very great potential importance. The administration of chloroform or ether is not a trifling matter. Both these drugs produce decided organic changes in the nervous system and other organswhether permanent or temporary is not yet definitely settled. But that pathologic changes, chiefly in the nature of fat metamorphoses, are produced (in the heart, lungs, liver, kidneys, brain) has been positively demonstrated by several investigators. The theory of Meyer and Overton that the action of the volatile anesthetics is due to their power to dissolve the fatty substance in the brain and nerve tissues is now generally accepted. This theory has recently received indirect corroboration at the hands of Nerking. Basing himself on the theory of Meyer and Overton he decided to find out, if possible, what influence if any the injection of such fatty substances as lecithin would have on the anesthetic properties of chloroform and ether. And his experiments have demonstrated that when lecithin is injected within a sufficiently short time after the animal has been anesthetized, the anesthesia is either curtailed or completely abolished. The assumption is made that the anesthetic is used up in combining with the lecithin circulating in the blood, thus preventing its combination with the lipoids of the nervous system, in other words, thus preventing anesthesia. Of course there is no sense in administering lecithin before anesthesia, for when we administer an anesthetic we do want anesthesia to be produced. But it has occurred to me that it would be an exceedingly valuable procedure to begin the administration of lecithin immediately or very soon after the operation has been completed. This would aid in replacing the lipoids which have been destroyed by the anesthetic, and would aid the patient in reaching a normal condition much sooner than without the administration of the lecithin. And it would very likely also prevent damage which may otherwise be permanent.

And this suggestion, without elaboration or embellishment, I present to the profession for what it may be worth. I believe there is a good deal in it. Lecithin is an absolutely non-toxic substance, while its beneficial effects are hardly a subject of doubt. So that a trial can certainly do no harm to the patient. As to the best method of administration-intravenous, hypodermic, or per os-this remains to be elaborated. All I know is that if I had to undergo anesthesia, I would insist upon being given large doses of lecithin for several days after the operation.

The Treatment of Gonorrhea.

It is with extreme diffidence that I write this editorial. It is unpleasant to be always-or even frequently-criticizing (it

is so much more pleasant and profitable to praise), for your motives are so readily misconstrued, and even if people acknowledge in the secret recesses of their hearts that what you say is perfectly true, they still resent your proclaiming the truth. We still have too many people who believe it is bad policy always to tell the truth. But we would be untrue to our journalistic ideal, if we hid our thoughts on any subject, and we will therefore say, that in our opinion, based on almost daily experience, the treatment of gonorrhea as generally practiced, is simply atrocious. We are strictly within the bounds of truth when we say that hardly a week passes in which we do not see examples of maltreatment of gonorrhea-insufficient treatment on the one hand, overtreatment on the other. The insufficient, inadequate treatment is generally to be charged to the busy general practitioner, who without any microscopic examination, often without any examination, prescribes some balsamic and an astringent hand injection, and thinks his duty is done. While the charge of overtreatment, unnecessarily meddlesome treatment can often be laid at the door of the specialist, particularly the one of the embryo variety. Believing that he must show the patient his superiority over the general practitioner, that he must do something for the five or ten dollars per visit, he endoscopes and cystoscopes, he massages and irrigates, and instills and dilates-with the frequent result that the inflammation increases in severity and spreads beyond its original boundaries.

I will permit myself to cull from an editorial which I wrote a year ago for THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, and which is à propos the subject under discussion:

Rash as the statement may sound and fully cognizant as we are of our temerity in making it, we nevertheless do make the statement, that in our opinion the treatment of gonorrhea to-day by the general practitioner is on the whole less satisfactory than it was fifty years ago. We were not in practice fifty years ago, but we have read pretty nearly everything written during that period about the treatment of gonorrhea, and we cannot escape one of two conclusions: Either that urethritis of half a century ago was a much milder, a much more benign disease than it is today, or that the treatment was more rational and more successful in the middle of the nineteenth than it is at the beginning of the twentieth century. As we have no justifiable ground whatsoever for the first conclusion, we are obliged, reluctantly, to take the other. As one studies the text-books published during the century, in chronological order, one is particularly struck with the gradually increasing percentage of sequelæ, as given by different authors. And this increasing percentage of posterior urethritis, prostatitis, vesiculitis, epididymitis, etc.,-can have but one etiology-the present-day methods of treatment.

It it not the purpose of the present editorial to outline the ideal treatment of urethritis or to compare the present methods

with those in vogue half a century or a century ago. Two statements, however, we shall make before concluding. The first is to the effect that the present day treatment of gonorrhea, as generally practiced, is entirely too brutal, or let us say meddlesome, if you prefer a milder expression. There is entirely too much. of careless injecting, instilling, irrigating, sounding, dilating, burning, expressing, et id omne genus, as a result of which we have hopelessly damaged urethras, with weakened cut-off muscles. relaxed vesical sphincters, dribbling urine, etc., and other complications so frequent, that we no longer call them complications, but natural (!) accompaniments of the disease.

We are very far from believing in a laissez-faire policy in medicine; but we do believe that by gentle measures we can accomplish more than by rough measures, and we further believe that frequently administered, prolonged and elaborate treatment is not always effective treatment; it is often quite the reverse.

A New Degree of Ph. C.

Do you know what chiropractic is? It is a new fake medical system; essentially an excrescence of osteopathy. We shall have something to say about it in another place. The chiropractors sent us their "journal" and we were surprised to see a number of Ph. C's among the contributors. We were non-plussed. We knew that pharmaceutical chemists were as a rule too logical, too brainy, too matter-of-fact to become the adherents of a fake system, based on ignorance and quackery. In fact, we do not believe that anybody who received a thoro course in chemistry could ever be upset by the insanities of Christian science, by the imbecilities of chiropractic or by any other vagaries. Chemistry is a true science based on proof and demonstration, and a soil fertilized with chemistry is not favorable to the growth of the seeds of superstition and humbug. And therefore I say, I was surprised. But the names and the titles were very clear: G. T. Callis, Ph. C.; Joy M. Loben, Ph. C.; B. J. Palmer, Ph. C., etc. An investigation disclosed the fact that Ph. C. in these cases did not stand for Pharmaceutical Chemists at all: they stood for Philosopher of Chiropractic.

Will there ever be an end to the spread and multiplication of frauds and fakirs?

"Two Cents' Worth."

Old age in itself is not a high recommendation-no more in a medical practitioner than in a medical journal. We have some old medical journals, which should in all decency allow themselves to be buried, and we have some old doctors, who should in all decency be retired with a pension. The good old doctors-God bless them. How naive some of them are! One of them who has practiced, he tells us, forty-five years, has learned during that

period a few things which he is willing to impart to beginners. One of these things is how to cure every case of diphtheria in 48 hours, without the use of antitoxin or any other medicine. He imparts this information thru the columns of the Medical World (February, 1909, p. 58). As I am afraid I may spoil the good doctor's valuable therapeutic advice in attempting to tell it in my own language, I will print the contribution verbatim. Here it is in its entirety, name and address included:

EDITOR MEDICAL WORLD:-I have practiced medicin about forty-five years, and in that time have learned a few things that may be useful to beginners; one of these things I give you: I have learned that two cents' worth of cyanide of mercury will cure any case of diphtheria. Unlike the antitoxin treatment, we do not figure the percentage of recoveries, because there are no deaths; every case is convalescent in forty-eight hours after treatment is commenced. The remedy is tasteless, and any child will take it as readily as water. There is no long sickness, no worry, no spread of the disease, no closing of schools, no fumigation of houses, and no trouble of any kind worth noticing.

Dayton, Fla.

A. J. PERKINS,
(Formerly Plainfield, Ill.)

Notice the minute details: exact dosage, frequency of repetition, method of administration, vehicle for solution, etc., etc. All that is included in the "two cents' worth." Why, if it is so cheap and easy to go thru a case of diphtheria, we will all take that instead of, say, a corn on our little toe. Sweet innocence. Only one error we find in the good doctor's scientific communication. He says that cyanide of mercury "is tasteless, and any child will take it as readily as water." As far as I know, mercuric cyanide has a nasty, bitter, metallic taste. The dispensatories say so, too. In conclusion, we might add for the benefit of those who might want to adopt the good doctor's treatment, to be just a bit careful with cyanide of mercury: it is one of the most poisonous, if not the most poisonous, metallic salts that we possess.

But honestly, isn't "two cents' worth of cyanide of mercury" the richest thing you have seen in a long time?

The Cancer Quack, Rupert Wells.

We are glad to be able to chronicle the fact that at last the post-office has issued a fraud order against that dastardly specimen of heartless quackery, Rupert Wells, "M. D."

During the several years of his pernicious activity this impudent charlatan has robbed, it has been shown, the poor sufferers afflicted with cancer of millions of dollars, while his remedies have been shown to be utterly worthless and fraudulent. For instance his marvelous, "radium impregnated fluid," Radol, has been shown to possess as much radioactivity as hydrant water does;