But we have found the extent of local damage and reflex injury to the organs, and more especially we have found the constant absorption of poisons into the system, due to the presence of feces. It is for this reason that the elimination of feces twice or thrice in twenty-four hours is advised. The condition for which an enema is used is disturbing and poisoning to the system. It is, therefore, a most unnatural condition. What is more rational, then, than to employ an “unnatural” yet not harmful means to bring about a more normal condition, one free from poisoning and irritating consequences? A fifth objection is made by those who have as a symptom of proctitis a large development of pile tumors or hemorrhoids (distended mucous membrane). The objection is that at times these tumors or sacs prolapse very freely during the act of expelling the injected water. But this prolapse occurs in many cases whether water is used or not. A certain amount of anal irritation caused by the passage of feces occurs, causing contraction of the circular muscular tissue that forms the anal and rectal canal, also of the longitudinal muscular bands and the levator muscles of the organs. The enema lessens or entirely diminishes the irritation of passing feces, and the natural result is that the serum-filled sacs called piles and the tissue loosened by the inflammatory product would more readily prolapse during the act of defecating. It is simply a choice between irritation of the stool keeping the tissue up and no irritation permitting a prolapse. Of course, if there be no expulsion of feces and water the stretched or dilated sacs may keep their places in the rectum. And then again the enema may be used for quite a period, when all at once a large prolapse of sacculated mucous membrane occurs, and the enema is thought to be the cause of it. That this is not the cause, let it be remembered that in all cases of proctitis the chronic inflammation is apt to become subacute or acute, and that this intense engorgement and enlargement of the tissue with blood and the increased fever in the parts often result in prolapse at any time, especially at times of convulsive effort at evacuation. Whatever follows the proper use of an enema, even though what follows be annoying, should not be blamed on the enema, for its action is most kindly, lessening, as it does, the irritation that otherwise would be more severe when the feces pass through a disease-constricted canal. The sixth objection is that the use of the enema will weaken the bowels, which are already too “weak” to expel their contents. “Atony, paralysis, fatty degeneration of the gut, are bad enough,” say these objectors, “without having an enema increase their uselessness.” Diagnosis wrong and objection groundless!