CORRESPONDENCE. THE POISON' O? CHOLERA STOOLS. TO 'I'llR EDITOR OF THE
"
INDIAN MEDICAL
GAZETTE."
offer some remarks upon the criticism which appears in your issue for the present month. My critic characterises my experiments as a " few rough and ready" ones, and censures me for venturing to give any opinion founded upon them. It is amusing, therefore, to lind him hazarding an opinion as to the nature of the poison which I found to exist in the excreta, in the course of the conduct of those experiments. As for my being confident that I had discovered the cause of cholera, I would refer your correspondent to the following words which which he criticises : ?" VVhat is now reoccur in the paper quired is a most thorough and searching enquiry into the chemistry of the alvine discharges in cholera so that the poison may be, if possible, isolated, and its chemical and physiological characters definitely determined." If Alpha knows the meaning of words, lie surely cannot find any expression of confidence either there or in the six propositions with which I conclude my paper, to the effect that I had discovered the cause of cholera, or that I claimed finality for ltiy investigation. I certainly expressed an opinion upon facts observed by myself, and in this particular I have the advantage of my critic who gives an opinion upon facts observed by another. Your correspondent states that I have theorized as to what the proper treatment of cholera ought to be, Now, this is a statement utterly without foundation, and not iery creditable to one who is so very punctilious about "well ascertained facts." I challenge him to point out one single word referring to the treatI made no reference whatever to such a ment of cholera. subject in my paper. Alpha will have gathered from the editorial footnote to his letter that I quite concur in his opinion to the eflect that the poison in question is probably a ptomaine. What part ptomaines play in the etiology of disease is at present positively unknown, and h
"
INDIAN MEDICAL
GAZETTE."
offer some remarks upon the criticism which appears in your issue for the present month. My critic characterises my experiments as a " few rough and ready" ones, and censures me for venturing to give any opinion founded upon them. It is amusing, therefore, to lind him hazarding an opinion as to the nature of the poison which I found to exist in the excreta, in the course of the conduct of those experiments. As for my being confident that I had discovered the cause of cholera, I would refer your correspondent to the following words which which he criticises : ?" VVhat is now reoccur in the paper quired is a most thorough and searching enquiry into the chemistry of the alvine discharges in cholera so that the poison may be, if possible, isolated, and its chemical and physiological characters definitely determined." If Alpha knows the meaning of words, lie surely cannot find any expression of confidence either there or in the six propositions with which I conclude my paper, to the effect that I had discovered the cause of cholera, or that I claimed finality for ltiy investigation. I certainly expressed an opinion upon facts observed by myself, and in this particular I have the advantage of my critic who gives an opinion upon facts observed by another. Your correspondent states that I have theorized as to what the proper treatment of cholera ought to be, Now, this is a statement utterly without foundation, and not iery creditable to one who is so very punctilious about "well ascertained facts." I challenge him to point out one single word referring to the treatI made no reference whatever to such a ment of cholera. subject in my paper. Alpha will have gathered from the editorial footnote to his letter that I quite concur in his opinion to the eflect that the poison in question is probably a ptomaine. What part ptomaines play in the etiology of disease is at present positively unknown, and h
