Valere Aude: Dare to Be Healthy, Or, The Light of Physical Regeneration. Louis Dechmann
that we realize to some extent the years that must elapse before mankind can be entirely set free from his hideous heritage, the harvest sown by past ignorance, deception and neglect.
But, from the malignant evil of internecine strife Universal Good is rising with an awakened nation's cry—a cry for freedom and release from the ever-lengthening chains of pernicious interests and obsolete institutions. The moment of release is at hand: That pyschological moment of which James Russell Lowell sings:
"Once to every man and nation Comes the moment to decide, In the strife of Truth with Falsehood, For the good or evil side."
And knowing what the People know—they who have borne so long, in grimly impotent silence, under the guise of Freedom, the fortunes of the slave—can we for one moment doubt what view their lawful, reasoning demand for redress will take and whether or no it will prevail? The hundred million voices of the Union sternly answer: NO!
In effecting this release, so far as the Science of Healing is concerned, my system, which I claim to be entirely original, will be found particularly efficacious, for it presents plainly and convincingly, in the light of the most recent discoveries, the truth that all constitutional diseases are but the variations of one basal deficiency; that the entire art of rational healing lies in a knowledge of the component parts of the body tissues, in a determination of the tissues involved in the process of degeneration in each specific instance, and in the subsequent treatment thereof by means of supplying to the blood the elements necessary to regenerate the tissues in question.
From this brief explanation may be judged the importance of the hygienic dietetic physician in cases of sickness. The quack and charlatan it is who persuade people to believe that they do not need the physician, and compel them to pay for this belief in money and in health. It is the obvious duty of every one to seek aid in case of sickness from some physician who is a profound and professed advocate of the only sensible, practical method of treatment; but, at the same time I would make it possible for all to acquire sufficient knowledge to enable them to judge for themselves whether the attendant summoned responds in some measure to this requirement, the simple and logical course of which contains at least some ray of hope for all who suffer.
It may not be amiss to cite here a brief outline of the teachings of the four bright particular stars who have served as beacon lights in the history and development of medicine. Not only does the modern medical world acknowledge the doctrines of these four men as the foundation upon which the practice of healing has been raised to a science, but moreover—a point much more important for our consideration—it also admits that the least essential part of the work of Hippocrates, the "Father of Medicine;" namely, his statement of theory, is the part which has been accorded permanent prominence, whilst the portion of greatest value in his labours; that is to say, the practical part, has been neglected and ignored.
The following passages are taken from the article entitled "History of Medicine" in the Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th. Edition, vol. XVIII, pages 42–51.
"Hippocrates, called the 'Father of Medicine,' lived during the age of Pericles, (495–429 B.C.), and occupied as high a position in medicine as did the great philosophers, orators, and tragedians in their respective fields.
His high conception of the duties and position of the physician and the skill with which he manipulated the materials that were at hand, constituted two important characteristics of Hippocratic medicine. Another was the recognition that disease, as well as health, is a process governed by what we call natural laws, learned by observation, and indicating the direction of recovery. These views of the 'natural history of disease' led to habits of minute observation and careful interpretation of symptoms, in which the Hippocratic school excelled and has been the model for all succeeding ages, so that even now the true method of clinical medicine may be said to be the method of Hippocrates.
One of the important doctrines of Hippocrates was the healing power of nature. He did not teach that nature was sufficient to cure disease, but he recognized a natural process of the humours, at least in acute disease, being first of all crude, then passing through coction or digestion, and finally being expelled by resolution or crisis through one of the natural channels of the body. The duty of the physician was to 'assist and not to hinder these changes, so that the sick man might conquer the disease with the help of the physician.'"
"Galen, the man from whom the greater part of modern European medicine has flowed, lived about 131 to 201 A.D. He was equipped with all the anatomical, medical, and philosophical knowledge of his time; he had studied all kinds of natural curiosities and was in close touch with important political events; he possessed enormous industry, great practical sagacity, and unbounded literary fluency. At that time there were numerous sects in the medical profession, various dogmatic systems prevailed in medical science, and the social standing of physicians was degraded. He assumed the task of reforming the existing evils and restoring the unity of medicine as it had been understood by Hippocrates, at the same time elevating the dignity of medical practitioners.
In the explanation and healing of diseases he applied the science of physiology. His theory was based upon the Hippocratic doctrine of humours, but he developed it with marvelous ingenuity. He advocated that the normal condition of the body depended upon a proper proportion of the four elements, hot, cold, wet and dry. The faulty proportions of the same gave rise, not to disease, but to the occasions for disease. He laid equal stress upon the faulty composition or dysaemia of the blood. He claimed that all diseases were due to a combination of these morbid predispositions, together with injurious external influences, and thus explained all symptoms and all diseases. He found a name for every phenomenon and a solution for every problem. And though it was precisely in this characteristic that he abandoned scientific methods and practical utility, it was also this quality that gained for him his popularity and prominence in the medical world.
However, his reputation grew slowly. His opinions were in opposition to those of other physicians of his time. In the succeeding generation he won esteem as a philosopher, and it was only gradually that his system was accepted implicitly. It enjoyed great, though not exclusive predominance until the fall of Roman civilization."
"Thomas Sydenham, (1624–1689) was well acquainted with the works of the ancient physicians and had a fair knowledge of chemistry. Whether he had any knowledge of anatomy is not definitely known. He advocated the actual study of disease in an impartial manner, discarding all hypothesis. He repeatedly referred to Hippocrates in his medical methods, and he has quite deservedly been styled the English Hippocrates. He placed great stress on the 'natural history of disease,' just as did his Greek master, and likewise attached great importance to 'epidemic constitution,' that is, the influence of weather and other natural causes on the process of disease. He believed in the healing power of nature to an even greater degree than did Hippocrates. He claimed that disease was nothing more than an effort on the part of nature to restore the health of the patient by the elimination of the morbific matter.
The reform of practical medicine was effected by men who advocated the rejection of all hypothesis and the impartial study of natural processes, as shown in health and disease. Sydenham showed that these natural processes could be studied and dealt with without being explained, and, by laying stress on facts and disregarding explanations, he introduced a method in medicine far more fruitful than any discoveries. Though the dogmatic spirit continued to live for a long time, the reign of standard authority had passed."
"Boerhaave. In the latter part of the seventeenth century a physician arose (1668–1738) who was destined to become far more prominent in the medical world than any of the English physicians of the age of Queen Anne, though he differed but little from them in his way of thinking. This was Hermann Boerhaave. For many years he was professor of medicine at Leyden, and excelled in influence and reputation not only his greatest forerunners, Montanus of Padua and Sylvius of Leyden, but probably every subsequent teacher. The Hospital of Leyden became the centre of medical influence in Europe. Many of the leading English physicians of the 18th century studied there. Boerhaave's method of teaching was transplanted to Vienna through one of his pupils, Gerard Van Swieten, and thus the noted Vienna school of medicine was founded.
The