Imagens das páginas
PDF
ePub

THE PHENOL TREATMENT OF CARBUNCLES AND HEMORRHOIDS

The treatment as applied to hemorrhoids is exceedingly simple, according to Skipper in Therapeutic Gazette. The parts are cleansed and painted lightly with pure phenol, a 10 per cent. cocaine or novocaine solution with adrenalin having previously been applied. After being painted the tissues are coated with vaseline, which is also spread over the surrounding skin. Cotton-batting is applied over the parts and held in place by a T-binder.

This writer claims that he has treated carbuncles and hemorrhoids successfully for a quarter of a century with phenol. "When the skin of the carbuncle is intact," he states, "a free crucial incision should be made after a preliminary anesthesia. Through this incision or the ulcerated opening pure carbolic acid should be thoroughly applied, the raw and granulating surfaces having previously been dried. The pure phenol is held in solution by heat. Every part of the ulcer should be saturated. The skin overlying the swelling should also be painted, precautions being taken that the acid does not run over the healthy surfaces. This treatment is repeated daily for five or six days. The results are at times amazing. After five or six days there is found a healthy, healing granulating surface which goes on to rapid cicitrization, far more rapid than that which follows the curette. As for dressing, a little vaseline placed on gauze and held in place by cotton-batting and a bandage is adequate."

LAXATIVE ENEMATA

Never use soap of any kind for the purpose of giving a laxative enema. All soaps are oleates, stearates or palmatates of sodium or potassium. All soaps are irritating as one finds out when soap suds get into one's eyes. Soap enemata irritate the rectal mucosa and set up actual inflammation not only of the rectum but also of the pelvic peritoneum or viscera.

Procrastination in sanitary reform is the thief of health.

The only prophylaxis against poliomyelitis that we know is personal hygiene and cleanliness in general. The microorganism accountable for the disease is supposed to make its entry into the body through the mucous membranes, especially the nasal membranes.

Other things being equal it is the man who leads the well-balanced life who lasts the longest, whose work to the end is uniformly the best, he who neither over-works nor overplays, neither over-eats, over-drinks, nor oversleeps; he who maintains a standard of simple healthy diet in moderation, who offsets mental work with physical recreation, who is as honest with his own body as he is with his own business. When success comes to such a one his physical and mental condition is such that he can enjoy in peace of mind and contentment of body the fruits of his labors.

Dr. Tiffany's "Journey around the World," appearing in installments in the Medical Fortnightly, should be republished in book form for the pleasure and enlightenment of those so unwise as not to be subscribers to that journal. All books of travel tell us merely of things as the traveler sees them at his time. Even Bayard Taylor's graphic notes are long since obsolete, and such works as Tiffany's, of travels during the present war, of the things of today, are of interest. His style is easy and natural, he makes no attempt at fine writing, but details those personal incidents that bring the places and people he sees vividly before us.

Dr. Bryce of The Southern Clinic ran a symposium on exophthalmic goiter, asking for original ideas and treatment that is "different." Nearly all who gave suggestions employed nerve and circulatory sedatives, a good many clung to iodine in some form, some prescribed this, that and the other thing. Some said drugs were useless and others thought certain drugs were curative. Several were strong in their asseverations that surgery was the only thing that promised any measure of success.

Leading Articles

Brief and practical articles, short and pithy reports of interesting cases in practice, new methods and new remedies as applicable in the treatment of diseases, are solicited from the profession for this department. Articles contributed for the Summary must be contributed to it exclusively. Write plainly and on one side of the paper.

2

The Editor is not responsible for the views of contributors.

BLOWING THE NOSE

BY JOHN C. WARBRICK, M.D.

Like the old established custom of shaking hands the common and familiar practice of blowing the nose is done in all kinds of ways and in almost every style but the proper one. Whether or not there is any correct method of using a handkerchief to blow the nose is not quite certain, but anyhow, the majority of people seem to follow a certain way that has been the rule in such matters for years.

The various methods of blowing the nose need not be stated here, sufficient to say that hardly anyone would use much else in the present day than the regular standard white linen handkerchief in most cases or a silk one, however, colored material of some kind may also be used and not seem in any way to be out of place.

Some, it may be said, have yet the bad habit of using their fingers when clearing the nasal passage of mucus. This should never be done in any case except that of extreme emergency, and more so in any public place. It is bad form also both disgusting and unsanitary.

In this connection may just be mentioned the case of an old shoemaker. The forefinger of his right hand was straight from the effect of having a felon so he could not bend it to any degree. Whenever it was necessary to use a handkerchief instead of doing so he would take his fore or stiff finger and draw it across the front of his nostrils then use his trousers for a handkerchief. This he would do repeatedly having formed the habit and he did not seem to think anything about it.

My attention has been drawn to this matter a number of times on account of the way a good many patients have taken hold of the

end of their nose when using a handkerchief or cloth to blow it.

Some of them seem to twist, pull or hold on to the end of it as if their object was to blow the ear drums out or dislocate the cartilages. This has caused the nose to bleed sometimes and more so after operations while it does not seem necessary to repel either mucus or crusts lodged in the passages.

The tip of the nose was not made soft or movable so it could be held much easier or squeezed when necessary to blow it. Forcible blowing by holding the end tight tends to create a tension in the nasal passages so there is more or less danger of a blood vessel breaking, especially if there is much congestion or any disease present.

In other cases the tympanic membrane may be injured or infected; material may be blown into the Eustachian tubes setting up inflammation.

About the best method to use when blowing the nose is the following which allows forcible expulsion of any mucus without creating any tension in the passages or of doing any harm whatever.

If the left hand is used the forefinger of it shall be placed against the nasal bone on the right side where it joins the cartilage, while the thumb is placed against the bony part on the opposite side so that the centre of the palm of the hand is nearly in front of the nostrils while the mucus is blown into the middle of the handkerchief. If the right hand is used the reverse is done. The forefinger of the right hand is placed against the nasal bone on the left side of the nose and the thumb against it on the right side.

As there is a great variety in the shape and size of the nose in different individuals the method of using a handkerchief to blow it, above will be suitable to all. 306 E. 43d St., Chicago, Ill.

NONSURGICAL TREATMENT OF CANCER VERSUS SURGICAL

BY G. N. MURPHEY, M.D.

When will the medical profession learn that surgery with the knife is one of the most uncertain expedients in the treatment of malignant growths?

he had been present at the extirpation by the knife of sixty-two cancers of the female breast, and not two of the individuals remained free of the disease two years after the operation: and that in those whom he saw a relapse it made quicker progress than it commonly did in others, when no operation had been performed." Many eminent surgeons of Europe endorse the above statement,

Fig. 1. Showing case at the beginning of treatment.

In the face of all the failures made by surgery in the treatment of cancer I cannot understand why the profession still cling to methods fraught with so much disappointment and failure. Some one writing upon this subject, whose name I am unable to give, says: "I know, by a life-time experience, that the method of extirpation of cancer with the knife is not attended with success, but on the contrary, aggravates the complaint. We have been called upon to treat the disease in all stages, both before and after excision, and therefore consider ourselves competent judges and now have to state that this operation is uncertain, ineffectual, and ought to be abandoned, and some other means substituted. Dr. Alexander Monroe of Edinburg, noted for his great medical skill and high reputation as an author, stated many years ago, that

among whom may be mentioned, Carmichael, Abernety, Sir Astly Cooper, Velpean, Cruvelier, Boyer, Lebert, and a host of German writers.

Dr. McFarland operated upon 118 cases, and could only claim two cures. Dr. Samuel Gross removed 408 cancers of the breast, and stated that all his cases, save one, died of a recurrence of the disease in

three years. Dr. D. Hayes Agnew said that he had removed enough cancerous breasts from women to fill an ordinary cart and failed to save a single life. I could cite the failures of many other surgeons in this line of work, but the foregoing ought to be sufficient to convince the most skeptical. I would not be understood to say

[graphic]
[graphic][merged small]

that the knife should be wholly abandoned in all cases of cancers, but in the great majority of cases it should be put aside for other more efficient methods.

I do not know how many cases Dr. Mayo has operated upon nor the percentage of cures he has made. Personally, I know of but three whom he has operated on for cancer. All of them went from this section of the country, two men and one woman. One of the men was a distinguished jurist of Hopkinsville, Ky., who had a small cancer on his lip. The cancer was removed and for a short while was thought to be a good cure, when it returned and was then removed two or more times by a surgeon in Evansville, Ind., but without success and he died of his cancer last week. The other man was from Metropolis, Ill., who had a cancer the size of a pigeon egg on his neck posterior to the ear.

[graphic]
[graphic]
[ocr errors]
[merged small][graphic][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]
[ocr errors]

Fig. 3. Photograph taken May 27th. This had been removed by a surgeon in his town when it was very small, but it soon returned. This man came to see me about the growth, and I advised him to have it treated with zinc needles and the galvanic current, but the surgeon who first removed it advised him to go to Rochester, Minn., and have it removed with the knife. This he did, but it only remained quiescent for three or four months when it again made its appearance. It was then treated with the X-ray for a while, but steadily progressed until it killed him about 18 months after the last operation with the knife. The woman is a resident of this city who had a malignant growth of the thyroid gland which Dr. Mayo removed and for a short time was thought to be a cure, but like the other two recurred, and she is

now said to be in a hopeless condition. So much for the "one essential method." We all know that there is absolutely no better surgeon than Dr. Mayo and the failures cited in this paper were not due to bad surgery but to the method employed per se.

During the past twenty-one years I have treated between three and four hundred cancers without the knife with an average of at least 80 or 85 per cent. of cures. I present some pictures with this article to show actual conditions before, during and after treatment. If any surgeon can show better results obtained with the knife, with the clinical evidence, let him do so and I will take off my

son's book on the treatment of cancer. I have some reprints of an article that I wrote for the American Journal of Clinical Medicine that was published May, 1915, in which I have outlined my treatment of cancer that I would be more than pleased to furnish anyone on request.

This is my fourth article on cancers in fifteen months. When I wrote my third one I supposed it would be my last paper on this subject, but when I think of the large number of people who die every year of cancer and realize that every case of external origin could be cured if only the proper methods of treatment were employed in time, I feel that it would be

[graphic][graphic][merged small]

hat to him, haul down my colors and surrender. I have cured a number of cases by nonsurgical means where surgery had failed to make a cure, but no surgeon or any one else has ever cured any patient of mine where I had failed to make a cure, moreover no case that I have pronounced incurable has ever been cured afterward. This may appear like a bit of egotism upon my part, nevertheless, it is true and the truth cannot deceive or wrong anyone.

I have omitted details and technique of my nonsurgical treatment of cancer in this paper as it can be better learned from Dr. G. Betton, Massey's book on Ionic surgery in the treatment of cancer, and Dr. A. R. Robin

Case 2. The result.

a great sin of omission to sit with folded hands and do nothing to awaken more interest in this great subject. I am aware that many, in fact most doctors, will not heed my appeals, but if only one competent man will do so, I shall feel fully compensated for my pains in writing this paper. Paducah, Ky.

Under conditions of civilized life, particularly urban, a diet largely vegetarian is more desirable than the diet commonly chosen as a matter of convenience and habit.-R. T. Morris.

« AnteriorContinuar »