An Attempt to Investigate the Seat of Animal Life — John Shaqi
An Attempt to Investigate the Seat of Animal LifeCurtis, Henry
Science
An Attempt to Investigate the Seat of Animal Life
Curtis, Henry
Life (Biology); Thesis (M.D.)
Conclusions have likewise been erroneously drawn from the fact of a
limb, dying when the supply of blood is cut off from it, but which
circumstance serves to prove that blood is the most natural stimulus,
and is essential to the perfect organization of the part; but the blood
is nothing without its oxygen. Abstract heat, which is an exciting
agent next in power, and you produce a like effect; mortification and
death, will ensue; yet no one will pretend to say that the principle of
caloric which pervades all matter is life.
But let it not be supposed while I thus object to the reputed vitality
of the blood, I wish either directly or indirectly to detract from the
importance of its use in the animal system. Conveying the principles,
which acted on by living organs form the various parts, and presuming
it the most general and applicable stimulus of the body, I can still
conceive its importance, and appreciate its value though itself be
dependent on external agents for its essential qualities.
Thus has the vital influence, passing for ages through all manner of
speculations, and tortured in all the variety of fanciful inventions,
been secured for a while in a doubtful repository by the ingenuity
of its advocates, or the authority of names, but it now comes to be
ousted from its local habitations, a dependent wanderer throughout the
body, for after all its changes we find it of later days expressed in
the excitability of Dr. Brown, acted on by external stimuli. “I say
the excitability of Dr. Brown,” though it is asserted that many before
him advanced the opinion of the dependent state of life on external
substances; because I am willing to allow him the credit, at least, of
being the first promulgator, and most zealous supporter of this simple
hypothesis.
Dr. Rush tells us in his publication on “animal life” that Dr. Cullen
advanced the opinion in 1766, that the Edinburgh professor afterwards
deserted it; and that _he_ (Rush) never did, but made it the foundation
for many of his rules of practice, and actually advocated the
doctrine in his course of lectures in 1771. And thus, we are given to
understand, slept unheeded and unapplied, in the manuscript sheets of
that professor, this important germ of a grand system, calculated by
its simplicity to revolutionize all former theories of medicine, until
by the arduous exertions of Dr. Brown an imperfect fabric was reared,
serving at least to point to the right path, after enquirers. This
digression will be excusable, in an attempt to fix, while adverting
to the origin of, the opinion, and however the question of priority
may be decided in the minds of gentlemen, whether they give credit to
Dr. Cullen for the first suggestion, or to the discriminating mind of
Dr. Rush as the strenuous supporter, they will not deny to Dr. Brown
the merit of first publishing――of overcoming the prejudices against,
and at length drawing the attention of the medical world to this novel
doctrine.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account