A. B. OLSEN
M. D. (Paper read in Medical Department meeting.)
Dietetics has been defined as the science of the systematic regulation of the diet for hygienic or therapeutic purposes. There is a diet for health, liberal and varied; but the diet for the sick differs, according to the nature of the illness and the immediate condition of the patient. Thus we have a diet for nephritis, diabetes, constipation, fever, anemia, gout, obesity, etc. Then there are the liquid, dry, fruit, milk, and many other diets. We have also a diet for infants, invalids, and the aged. GCB May 31, 1909, page 232.12
I do not propose in this paper to deal with detailed diets, but rather with scientific principles which ought to determine the selection of our food, no matter what specific diet we may be following. Science asks what is required for the sustenance of the body, and then seeks to obtain it from the purest and most wholesome sources, in order best to meet the requirements of the body. GCB May 31, 1909, page 232.13
Food serves the body by providing building material in childhood and youth, for the purpose of growth and development, and material for repair throughout life. The larger part of food at any age, and especially in adult life, is expended in providing heat to maintain the body temperature, and energy for the work of the heart and for locomotion and manual labor. GCB May 31, 1909, page 232.14
There are two great classes of foods, looked at from a scientific standpoint—nitrogenous and carbonaceous. Besides these, we have salts, both organic and inorganic, and water. Nitrogenous foods are further divided into proteids or bumens, albumoses, peptones, and gelatines. They are essential to growth, repair, and the functional activity of tissues and organs; but their use is not confined to these purposes, for they contain a carbonaceous moiety, and are consequently capable of producing heat and energy to a considerable extent. Carbonaceous foods include sugars, starches, and fats—carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen only, without any nitrogen. This absence distinguishes them from nitrogenous foods. Their specific purpose is to supply the body with heat and physical and mental force and fatty tissue. But they also aid to some extent in nourishing and building up. GCB May 31, 1909, page 232.15
We have next to consider the sources of these various food elements. The ordinary diet of man is obtained from three sources, the animal, vegetable, and mineral kingdoms. Most people, including so-called vegetarians, take animal food of one kind or another, either the flesh or the product of the dairy. We, as food reformers, avoid the flesh of animals, including fish and fowl; but we take animal products in the form of milk, cream, butter, and eggs. Hence, our food is obtained from the three kingdoms enumerated above, and we are not vegetarians in the true sense of the term. GCB May 31, 1909, page 233.1
Why do we not eat animal flesh? There are a number of good reasons. We shall not refer to the teaching of the Scriptures in this paper, nor to the question of ethics, but will deal with the matter solely from the standpoint of science:— GCB May 31, 1909, page 233.2
I. It is not necessary to slay animals in order to obtain our food. There is no difficulty in getting all the requirements of the body in the way of nourishment, without butchering animals. GCB May 31, 1909, page 233.3
2. Animals are subject to diseases of various kinds, many of which may be transmitted to man. I will mention only a few: Anthrax; actinomycosis; glanders; foot-and-mouth disease; tetanus; tuberculosis; typhoid fever; dysentery and diarrhea; swine fever; pleuro-pneumonia; septicemia; cattle plague, blood-poisoning; trichinosis; hydatids; also the various tapeworms of fish, beef, veal, and pork. GCB May 31, 1909, page 233.4
Both fowls and fish, as well as cattle, are subject to tuberculosis, and there is always danger of infection. Tuberculosis is the great plague of cattle, as well as of man. It is a safe estimate to say that from 15 to 20 per cent of the cattle throughout civilized lands are affected with tubercular disease. In some herds the proportion has been much higher, even reaching 90 per cent or more. GCB May 31, 1909, page 233.5
There is a further matter to consider, and that is the great difficulty that even an expert often finds in recognizing diseased meat. Extremely few have a chance to examine the pig, sheep, or cow before the animal is slaughtered. After the carcass is cut up and exposed for sale, the question of whether the animal was healthy becomes a very difficult one indeed, and requires for its solution special training and the closest observation. The novice is only able to recognize the more striking and outstanding cases which could scarcely escape detection under any circumstances. Recently I spent some time inspecting flesh from the London market. The specimens I saw had already been seized by the sanitary inspector. The evidence of disease was obvious enough in some cases, but I should certainly not have recognized it in others, if my attention had not been especially called to the different disease processes. Among those that I recall, I saw cases of glanders, actinomycosis, of pork infected with trichinae, of hydatids of the liver, “measly beef,” and numerous specimens of tubercular disease. GCB May 31, 1909, page 233.6
3. Even though the diseased flesh does not convey directly a specific disease, it must be apparent to all that such flesh is wholly unfit for human consumption; for it has poor nourishing properties, makes a low grade of flesh tissue, weakens vital resistance, and, on account of the disease products that it contains, poisons the body, causes vague headaches and other aches and pains, and produces general discomfort and mental depression. In a word, diseased food of any kind, and especially diseased flesh, breaks down the resistive forces of the body, opening the door to any passing disease. GCB May 31, 1909, page 233.7
4. But suppose the animal is free from all diseases, including fever,—which is probably the exception rather than the rule,—and suppose it has been properly slain and bled, and then exposed for sale at once before undergoing putrefaction; and, further, suppose it is thoroughly cooked, even then I ask, Shall we eat it? “No,” is our emphatic answer. And the scientific reason for that answer is a very simple one: Animal flesh, under the most favorable circumstances, always contains a large amount of refuse, which we call tissue wastes. This is fit only for the garbage barrel, and not for the human stomach. To be sure the stomach of a healthy man can take care of such refuse better than that of a sick person; but in any case it must be obvious to all that it is undesirable to take refuse matter of any kind with our food. The flavors of flesh are due solely to the presence of this refuse. To demonstrate this, take a piece of flesh, soak it in warm water, and cook it slowly for hours, to extract the juices. Then try a mouthful. How much flavor has it?—Practically none. It is insipid and tasteless, because the organic extractives, i.e., the refuse matter, have been removed. The flesh of a healthy animal, that has been cooked in this way for the purpose of getting rid of waste matter, is the least harmful and objectionable; but even then it should only be resorted to in the absence of other food. GCB May 31, 1909, page 233.8
Much might be said concerning the various animal products, but my space is too limited to deal with them as I should like to. Take milk, for example. I have given much time recently to the analysis of milk at Guy’s Hospital. The bacteriological method of analyzing milk is identical with that of sewage. Indeed, I analyzed one sample of milk that contained a larger number of germs than any sewage I found. I do not remember the exact number, but it was more than 40,000,000 per cubic centimeter. Suffice it to say that milk—at least that in the large cities—is undoubtedly the dirtiest food that is taken into the stomach. Such milk is a slow poison, and causes the death of tens of thousands of infants and children each year. GCB May 31, 1909, page 233.9
Milk is also a prolific source of tuberculosis, and for that reason it should always be Pasteurized or boiled, before using, if there is the least suspicion as to its purity. It has also been known to carry typhoid fever, scarlet fever, diphtheria, dysentery, diarrhea, and other diseases. GCB May 31, 1909, page 233.10
Let us now turn our attention to the vegetable kingdom for a few moments. Here, too, we food reformers attempt to draw a line, selecting the wholesome and good, rejecting the harmful. We object, and that rightly, I believe, to all narcotic stimulants, including alcohol, tobacco, tea, and coffee. Neither of these articles is a real food. Listen to Dr. Robert Hutchison, the eminent food specialist of London. He says, in his excellent book on diet: “Tea and coffee are in no sense foods.” That is the truth. More, both act as poisons on the body, and especially upon the nervous system, and are the direct cause of many disorders and complaints. GCB May 31, 1909, page 233.11
Of condiments, such as spices, pepper, mustard, hot sauces, and the like, I need only say that in my opinion all artificial appetizers are to be strictly avoided; for they not only conduce to overeating, which is quite as bad as taking unwholesome food, but, acting as irritants, they hinder the digestion and assimilation of food, and form a prolific cause of digestive disturbances. The best sauce is hunger, and the best appetizers are fresh air and hard work. Under ordinary circumstances, a person should not eat until he has a natural appetite. More people among us suffer from repletion than from starvation. Manual labor and physical culture are essentials to good digestion. GCB May 31, 1909, page 233.12
In conclusion, let me point out that, judged solely from the view-point of science, fruits, nuts, cereals, and vegetables contain all the elements required for the maintenance of the body in health, or for the dietetic cure of disease; and if dairy products are added, there is a superabundance of good, nourishing food to set before any one. GCB May 31, 1909, page 233.13