The New Glutton or Epicure. Fletcher Horace

      The New Glutton or Epicure

      PREFACE

      The original "Glutton or Epicure" has been completely revised and much enlarged, including considerable new matter added in the form of testimony by competent investigators, which confirms the original claims of the book and supplements them with important suggestions.

      The "New Glutton or Epicure" is now issued as a companion volume to the "A.B. – Z. of Our Own Nutrition," in the "A. B. C. Series," and is intended to broaden the illustration of the necessity of dietetic economy in the pursuit of an easy way to successful living, in a manner calculated to appeal to a variety of readers; and wherein it may suggest the scrappiness and extravagance of an intemperate screed, the author joins in the criticism of the purists and offers in apology the excuse that so-called screeds sometimes attract attention where more sober statement fails to be heard.

      Especial attention is invited to the "Explanation of the A.B.C. Series," at the back of this volume, as showing the desirability of regard for environment in all its phases; and also to the section, "Tell-tale Excreta," on page 142, an evidence of right or faulty feeding persistently neglected heretofore, but of utmost importance in a broad study of the nutrition problem.

      The professional approval of Drs. Van Someren, Higgins, Kellogg, and Dewey, representing wide differences of points of view and opportunity of application, are most valuable contributions to the subject. The confirmation of high physiological authority strengthens this professional endorsement. The testimony of lay colleagues given is equally valuable and comes from widely separated experiences, and from observers whose evidence carries great weight. The commandante of a battleship cruising in foreign waters and representing the national descent of Luigi Cornaro; a general manager of one of the largest insurance companies of the world; a cosmopolitan artist of American farm birth and French matrimonial choice and residence; and a distinguished bon vivant, each with a world of experience, testifying in their own manner of expression, is appreciated as most valuable assistance to the cause of economic dietetic reform.

      During the original experiments in Chicago, and in Dayton, Ohio, the originator was much indebted to James H. Lacey, Esquire, of New Orleans, La., and Cedar Rapids, for helpful suggestions, which his early training as a pharmaceutical chemist rendered him able to give.

      There are also numerous altruistic, self-sacrificing women, who have been active colleagues of the author in testing the virtues of an economic nutrition, and who have greatly assisted in making the economy an added new pleasure of life, instead of being a restraint or a deprivation. This is accomplished easily by a change of attitude towards the question, and in such reform women must have an important part to play. To their kindly meant, but hygienically unwise, aggressive hospitality, in begging friends to eat and drink more than they want, just to satisfy their own generous impulses, is due much of the milder gluttony that is prevalent.

      Imposition upon the body of any excess of food or drink is one of the most dangerous and far-reaching of self-abuses; because whatever the body has no need of at the moment must be gotten rid of at the expense of much valuable energy taken away from brain-service. Hence it is that when there is intestinal constipation the energy-reserve is lowered enormously, and even where there is no painful obstruction, the mere passage of waste through some twenty to twenty-five feet of convoluted intestinal canal is a great tax upon available mental and physical power; and this disability is often imposed on innocent men by well-meaning women in the exercise of a too aggressive hospitality.

      Mention of constipation suggests another reference to one of the specially new features of this discussion, insisted upon by a truly economic and æsthetic nutrition, and herein lifted out of the depths of a morbid prejudice to testify to the necessity of care in the manner of taking food for the maintenance of a respectable self-respect. So firmly rooted is the fallacy that a daily generous defecation is necessary to health that less frequent periodicity is looked upon with alarm, whereas a normally economic nutrition is proven by greater infrequency, accompanied by an entire absence of difficulty in defecating and by escape from the usual putridity due to the necessity of bacterial decomposition.

      To illustrate the prevailing ignorance relative to this most important necessity of self-care, and also a traditional prejudice, even among physicians, the following extract from a letter just received is given: "You ask me to define more exactly what I mean by constipation; this is not at all difficult; I mean skipping a day in having a call to stool. There was no trouble about it, and the quantity was not large, but when I mentioned it to my doctor he advised me to stop chewing if it interfered with the regular daily stools. I must confess that I never felt so well as while I was chewing and sipping, instead of the hasty bolting and gulping which one is apt to do on thoughtless or busy occasions, but I don't think it is worth while for a chap to monkey with his hygienic department when he is employing a professional regularly to tell him the latest kink about health." To this surprising state of … the evidence of "professionals" like Van Someren, Kellogg, Higgins, and Dewey, as well as that of the great men of physiology who have spoken herein, and in the "A.B. – Z. of Our Own Nutrition," gives hopeful answer, but suggests a warning.

      The author has noticed that immediately folk begin to give attention to any new régime relative to diet, exercise, mental discipline, or whatever else, they begin to charge all unusual happenings to the change of habit, whereas before the same things were common but unnoticed. Even among men of scientific habit of thought, unduly constipated by stale conservatism, the old, old corpse of tradition, "The accumulated experience of the whole race must be correct," is revived and used in argument contentiously; but to this relapse into non-scientific reasoning comes the reply: "If the accumulated experience of the human race is evidence that crime and disease are natural, then disease and crime are good things and should not be discouraged."

      There are many sorts of constipation, the worst of which are constipation of affection, of appreciation, of gratitude, and of all the constructive virtues which constitute true altruism. Let us avoid sinning in this regard! In pursuit of this thought the following is àpropos: