APPENDIX TO SECOND EDITION.

1 [NOTE ON DEEP BREATHING.]

A Good Hobby.—On pages 84, 111, and 137 I have barely touched upon this subject. I wish now to call attention to it as a matter worthy of greater consideration than might perhaps be gathered from what has been said. Personally, I begun the practice, when I was about sixteen years old, of taking long, deep breaths occasionally, at odd times during the day, from reading a little slip explaining its usefulness in “strengthening” the lungs, and increasing their capacity. At the age of eighteen, I remember, upon being examined for a life insurance policy, the examining surgeon expressed great surprise at the unusual “swell” or expansion of my chest—about five inches increase when my lungs were fully inflated, over chest-measure when I had forced out as much air as I could conveniently. Upon explaining, that for a number of years I had made a practice of throwing my shoulders back, taking very deep inspirations slowly, holding my breath a moment, and then as slowly “breathing out”—doing this the first thing every morning on rising, and in a sleeping-room which was never close, again on going out, and occasionally during the day,—the doctor said: “A good plan that accounts for it.” In all cases of weak lungs, whether chronic or from “taking cold” (see pp. 40 to 45 for a consideration of the colds delusion), when it is difficult to take a full breath on account of “cramps,” catches, or pain in the lungs, this practice will be found of great value, if persisted in. In many instances it seems impossible to take a long breath—is, indeed, impossible; but a little gain may be made every day, by crowding down “one notch,” so to say, at each trial. Quite a large percentage of all persons will find on trial that there is more or less of tenderness upon first making the attempt, or at one time or another, whenever there is any degree of irritation of the stomach. The patient, or experimenter, should inspire a little, however little, beyond the point which seems all that he can do, and persist in this treatment every day. There can be no doubt but we have here a most important aid in the treatment of consumption, not only, but of all ill-conditions of the physical man. But the deep, full breathing that comes from having exercised vigorously is best of all (see page 84).

2 [NOTE ON BRIGHT’S DISEASE.]

How to Eat Meat.—In the chapter on this subject, I have taken the position that Albuminuria results from: (1) excess in diet; (2) the use of foods that can not, or are not properly masticated and insalivated, as mush, or bread wet and washed down with any sort of artificial fluids, gravy-drowned vegetables, etc.; (3) stimulating drinks, as beer, spirits, tea, coffee, etc.; (4) excess of animal food. To this I must add meat eaten in a manner totally different from that in vogue with all carnivorous animals, viz.: hashed, or tender and well chewed, instead of being, as it should be, swallowed in pieces of convenient size—a rational modification in the premises, surely. Dogs, wolves, cats, and the like, are gourmands, to be sure, but this is not the fundamental reason for their manner of gulping their natural food whole. It has been shown by experiments that dogs fed on hashed meat suffer from indigestion, a portion of their food passing undigested, while if fed the same quantity of meat in chunks, no part of it appears in the excreta, but all is perfectly digested.

Grain-eating animals teach us how to eat grain; or at least, how to masticate farinaceous food. We may well learn from the carnivore an analogous lesson—not, however, necessarily dispensing with knife and fork, napkin or finger-bowl, nor any other improvement over their primitive fashions!

THE POINT IS THAT FLESH-FOOD,

unlike starchy foods, requires stomach digestion only (as against any change in the mouth), and only when taken in the natural manner, that is, substantially as meat-eating animals take it, is it retained in the stomach for a sufficient length of time to be dissolved by the gastric juice; but much of it passes on into the intestine prematurely (explaining, in great measure, the many cases of inflammation of the bowels, as well as the frequent lesser disturbances), and doubtless a considerable proportion is absorbed in a more or less fermented state, adding thereby impure elements to the blood, and predisposing the individual to inflammatory disease. On the contrary, if meat is swallowed in pieces of moderate size, each piece being acted upon at the surface gradually dissolves from the outside, and so is perfectly changed by the gastric juice before leaving the stomach. In personal experiments I find much less inconvenience from eating flesh-food in this manner than results when I treat it as we have always been taught to. It may be well to caution against eating a large portion of meat in this manner at first; it would give the stomach a new experience and likely enough create disturbance. One-half the usual amount, taken naturally, would yield as much nourishment as the full ration, perhaps; at any rate the change should be made gradually (see pp. 50-158, for further consideration of the animal food question). The following from the Practitioner, corresponds (as far as M. Semmola carries the point) with my view of the matter entirely, as regards the nature of the malady. Albuminuria, or excess of albumen (that is, unappropriated albuminoids in the circulation, and which are consequently excretory matters), must necessarily result from any or all of the causes I have named—causes of indigestion. Says the Practitioner:

“At a recent meeting of the Paris Academy of Medicine, M. Semmola, of Naples (‘Progrès médical,’ June 9, 1883), brought forward a new theory with regard to the causation of Bright’s disease. This malady he regards as not essentially renal, but as consisting in a general morbid alteration of nutrition, and observes that albumen in such cases is not passed by the urine only, but by all the secretory organs. This alteration [or, rather, I should say, the lack of alteration by digestion] deprives the albuminoid materials of the blood of their power of being assimilated, and so causes their excretion by the emunctories. The renal lesions he ascribes to mechanical irritation of the tubules of the kidney by the constant passage of albumen through them. Albuminuria is therefore a cause, not a result, of renal disease.[93] M. Simmola founds these views on a series of experiments on animals. He injected into the blood-vessels various substances containing albumen, as white of egg, milk, and blood-serum, with the result of inducing artificial Bright’s disease. White of egg was most active in this way.”

3 [NOTE TO PAGE 169.]

Water As Medicine and Food.—There is no royal road to health once deeply diseased. In certain cases, and for a limited period even in these, hot water is invaluable. But if long continued—used as a constant beverage instead of a temporary expedient to aid in removing the slime and “gurry” from stomachs deeply coated[94]—the effect will be to keep this organ weak, as a number of Turkish baths every day would enfeeble, in time, the strongest man. One valid objection to tea, chocolate, and coffee is, that they are usually taken hot (see “Coffee, etc.”).

Warm water is about the most effectual remedy known to me for acute dyspepsia. It should be drunk profusely, even to stomach distension, with finger exploration, if necessary, to produce vomiting; then a few cupfuls to retain, to wash away any residue of undigested food, dilute the blood, etc. But cool, fresh water is the beverage par excellence for all the year round (see pp. 76-90-100).

4 [NOTE ON “NATURAL DIET.”]

With regard to the suggestion, on page 211, of using milk to wet farinaceous foods, in place of depending solely upon the natural mouth-juices, I wish to say that it was felt by me, at the time, to be entirely unphysiological, and by no means the best way to manage. I now wish to urge that in so far as any one chooses to test the advantages of this regimen he will not depart from a truly natural way, so far as the natural way is possible; but rather use the whole grain, or the whole meal dry, and take the milk (if indulged in at all) by itself, and fruit likewise—after the grain. Several remarkable cases have occurred since this book was first issued, in which the curative powers of this diet have been displayed in a most marked manner. I take occasion to mention one. Mrs. L., of Lee, N. H., had been suffering for eight years, during which she had been able to walk but little. She was growing worse, and finally was pronounced by her physician incurably diseased with “ovarian tumor.” After six months’ use of uncooked food—a breakfast of fruit only, with dinner at night composed of unsifted wheat meal (from one-third to one-half cupful, at first, the amount increased later with increased exercise); dry, followed with a little fruit—she is up and about the house, aiding in the housework, and the past week did the entire family ironing. She has been for eight years a great sufferer, but all her pains have been banished, and her strength and general health are steadily improving under a continuance of the diet as above described, together with light, loose clothing, much fresh air, air-baths, self hand-rubbing, and gradually increasing exercise from very small beginnings.

5 [NOTE TO PAGE 232.]

The Long-sought Principle.-It is confessedly a standing disgrace to our profession that, after all the boasted “progress in medicine” during these hundreds of years of research and experimentation, not one great principle has been established by means of which the people can be, even if disposed (and it can hardly be said that they are, generally), guided toward perfect health. It is charged that vegetarianism, even, has failed to speedily make sound, bright-eyed, clear-skinned, healthy and therefore handsome men and women, out of life-long “sinners” against the laws of life; and it must be admitted that not all its promises are verified in practice, although it seldom fails to greatly improve all who adopt the regimen (imperfect as it is—and it is very imperfect) as practiced at the various hygienic Cures at home and abroad. The trouble is that food-reformers have only undertaken to modify, with half-way measures—to change a very bad diet for one far from good, one form of “mush” for another less harmful, but by no means physiological. I would assert here as the one all-sufficient principle, so far as physical health is concerned, looking to the rearing of children, that if we were to take a thousand new-born infants—good, bad, and indifferent, as to inheritance—and give them pure cow’s milk, avoiding the cramming that is universally practiced; say, give them two full meals, or three moderate ones a day (the quantity altogether gauged by the individual’s digestive capacity); and, as they should arrive at suitable age (i. e., as teeth began to develop), feed them on strictly natural food—the natural diet—fruits, and grains (in winter, soaked twelve hours in little water[95]), the fruit in large proportion; give them a chance to develop normally, such as other young animals have—i.e., give them freedom from holding, tending, baby-carting, and the like, except in the smallest measure; dress them lightly, keep them free from foul air, by sufficient ventilation of all living rooms; give them the utmost freedom of the lawns or the ground—outdoor exercise—give them this sort of treatment, and not five per cent. would die under five years of age, nor, with fair regard for the known laws of life, would many fail to reach old age in health. The at present supposably-inevitable “diseases of infancy and childhood” could not exist. The influence of the constant tending and holding to which all infants are subjected is disastrous in a twofold degree: (1) for many months they are prevented from taking much voluntary exercise, and (2) this makes the involuntary cramming relatively more excessive; hence they grow fat and disordered in every way, and predisposed to all manner of sicknesses. Children scarcely ever have occasion to use their teeth. The food in use requires no chewing. Little demand is made upon the salivary glands (for food is hot, moist, and “goes down itself”); hence these glands, which consequently fail to develop normally, become at some time acutely diseased, or finally almost if not entirely useless. Hollow, sunken cheeks result from this cause. It was never designed to remedy this defect with fat. The parotid glands and the cheek muscles should be developed and maintained by physiological eating. The teeth for want of use fail, as the muscular system declines through indolence. Unnatural food, fast eating, overeating, poor teeth, dentists, “mumps,” plethora, and febrile diseases, or chronic dyspepsia, and all manner of ailments—this is the present order of things (see advertisement of “How to Feed the Baby”).

6. TIRED FROM INACTION: TOO MUCH “REST.”

The person who works to-day and gets tired, perhaps almost exhausted, feels sure from former experiences that he will rise next morning well able to work again; and providing he does not overdraw the account continually, the more he does the more he can do. It is upon this principle that our athletes acquire and maintain condition.

But the consumptive, the delicate person, who, as is the case generally, has grown weaker and weaker from doing less and less (and this is in accordance with natural law), becomes at last “tired” in such a manner, that without an entire change—a right about face—there is no such thing as getting rested this side the grave. This exhaustion from indolence must be changed for the tiredness resulting from physical exertion, or there is no hope of “cure.” Friends must learn the error of their ways; they must cease the eternal discouragement of the loved one; there must be no more of the incessant, “Now, Jenny, sit right down—you will get too tired”; “There, now, let me do that—you know how little it takes to tire you”; “You are crazy to think of going outdoors such a day as this,” etc., etc. (see page 85). However kindly meant all this is, it is, in practice, “hitting a man when he is down”; while the usual encouragement to eat (digestion or no digestion)—to eat (appetite or no appetite—the inaction often forbidding all desire for food) is, to use a sporting phrase, a companion “slugger” that finally knocks the weakling off the stage. This is what produces the phlegm as fast as the poor victim can cough it up. Because he has nothing to do—because he does nothing—but ponder over his condition, eat, manufacture phlegm and “raise” it, he lowers himself more and more, until he gets to the bottom. He has “raised” about everything; only the frame, the skeleton, is left to bury (see pp. 72, 78, 92, 97, 104).

A FEW OF THE MANY NOTES FROM READERS OF THE FIRST EDITION OF “NATURAL CURE.”

J. Russ, Jr., Haverhill, Mass., says: “Dr. Page’s explanation of the ‘colds’ question is alone worth the price of a hundred copies of the book—it is, in fact, invaluable, going to the very root of the cause of sickness.”

Mrs. W. O. Thompson, 71 Irving Place, Brooklyn, N. Y., says: “I wish every friend I have could read it, and, only that hygienists never harbor ill-feeling, that my enemies might not chance to find it. I owe much to the truths made clear in ‘Natural Cure’; more, indeed, than to all the health literature I have ever read (and I had read much, because I had much need); and it is certain that my sister-in-law owes her life and present robust health to the professional attendance of its author.”

FROM A TEACHER.

Mrs. S. S. Gage, teacher in the Adelphi Academy, Brooklyn, N. Y., says: “My friend, Mrs. Thompson, recommended this book (‘Natural Cure’) to me. Thanks to her and ‘the book,’ my old headaches trouble me no more; I am cured of catarrh and partial deafness, and, in fact, am better in every way. I never could accomplish so much and with so little fatigue; and I am sure that all my intellectual work is of better quality than it ever was before.”

FROM A HUSBAND.

D. Thompson, Lee, N. H., says: “Through following the advice in ‘Natural Cure’ my headaches, which have tortured me at frequent intervals for forty years, return no more. Formerly I could not work for three days at a time, now I work right along. For this, as well as for the restoration of my wife to health, after we had given her up as fatally sick, I have to thank Dr. Page and ‘The Natural Cure.’”

FROM THE WIFE.

Mrs. S. E. D. Thompson, Lee, N. H., says: “I can not well express my gratitude for the benefit I have received from this book and the author’s personal counsel. Condemned to die, I am now well. It is truly wonderful how the power of resting is increased under the influence of the regimen prescribed. I have distributed many copies of this book, and have known of a life-long asthmatic cured, biliousness removed, perennial hay fever banished for good, and other wonderful changes produced, by means of the regimen formulated in ‘Natural Cure.’ A friend remarked: ‘It is full of encouragement for those who wish to live in clean bodies.’ Another said: ‘It has proved to me that I have been committing slow suicide.’ Our minister says: ‘I have modified my diet and feel like a new man.’”

To this Mrs. Thompson adds, for the author’s first book, “How to Feed the Baby”: “I have known of a number of babes changed from colicky, fretful children to happy well ones, making them a delight to their parents, by following its advice.”

William C. Langley, Newport, R. I., says: “While all would be benefited from reading it, I would especially commend it to those who, from inherited feebleness, or who, like myself, had declined deeply, feel the need of making the most of their limited powers. I may add, that this work bears evidence that the author has had wide range and extensive reading, together with a natural fitness for physiological and hygienic research, keen perception of natural law and tact in its application.”

Solomon Alexander, No. 252 East Fifty-second Street, New York, says: “I have been greatly benefited by Dr. Page’s treatment for inflammatory rheumatism and Bright’s disease, and am now steadily improving under his direction.” July 27, 1883. (Now well, November, 1883.)

Mrs. Dr. Densmore, 130 West 44th Street, New York, says: “You can judge of my opinion of ‘Natural Cure’ when I tell you that I am buying it of the publishers by the dozen to distribute among my patients.”

The Popular Science Monthly for September, 1883, says: “The author gives several remarkable examples of wonderful cures which he knows of having been effected by following the principles he lays down—principles which may be followed with profit, and the following of which may relieve many cases regarded as desperate; and he has given the public a most valuable manual of hygiene.”

The Atlantic Monthly for August, 1883, says: “An effort at impressing common-sense views of preserving and restoring health.”

Several hundreds of most flattering notices from secular and religious journals, on file at the publishers’ office, indicate how this work is being received by the public.

SPECIAL NOTE.

It is evident from the nature of the press notices of “The Natural Cure,” that the prefatorial request has been very generally complied with, and that not only have critics managed to obtain an understanding of the author’s position as regards the only certain means for physical improvement from low conditions, but they are disposed to sustain him in that position. Here and there one, however, as was to be expected, from ignorance of natural law, from personal preferences or notions, from faith in the old way (which has so long been on trial and so signally failed), has failed to comprehend the matter. Diving into the middle of the book, selecting some chapter or paragraph which forbids a consumptive or any frail patient, while doing nothing, to eat like a woodchopper or a railroad hand, and especially warns such from eating worse kinds of food than the man of mighty strength who might, through the influence of active outdoor pursuits, get rid of considerable coffee, pie, cakes, pickles, etc., and (providing his diet included plenty of coarse food) even thrive in spite of a good deal of such material (for we know that many indoor loafers, even, are too tough to be speedily killed by such a diet)—carping critics, we mean to say, selecting some special paragraph have held the advice up as “too radical in theory.” But no person of sound mind can read this book through with even a fair degree of care, and not learn that its chief aim is to teach people who are now starving, or who are at best poorly nutrified, and, next to these, the well ones who mean to keep on the safe side, the way to live in order to be well nourished and free from the pains, aches, and sicknesses which cover the land with wrecks of human beings—dying—who might better live in clean, sound, and easy bodies.