Where, from long over-indulgence or other causes, the appetite cannot be safely followed as a guide in regulating the quantity of food, we shall not err very far if we proportion our meals to the amount of the preceding exercise. When this has been active and in the open air, and waste has consequently been considerable, a liberal allowance of food will be more easily digested than perhaps half the quantity would be after a week’s inaction. Hence it is a great error to devour the same quantity of food daily, whatever our mode of life and bodily exertion may be; because “the strong food which the strong action of strong bodies requires will soon destroy weak ones--if the latter attempt to follow the example of the former--instead of feeling invigorated, their stomachs will be as oppressed as a porter is with a load that is too heavy for him--and under the idea of swallowing what are called strengthening nourishing things, will very soon make themselves ready for the undertaker.”[43] And yet nothing is more common than to see persons who have passed from a life of varied activity to one of a purely sedentary nature continue to eat--merely because they have been accustomed to it--as much food as if they were still engaged in constant bodily exertion. Many females of the higher and middle classes, who scarcely ever stir out of doors except to church, nevertheless make as hearty meals twice or thrice a day as if they were undergoing pretty severe exertion; but they sooner or later reap their reward, and after groaning for a time under the burden which they have placed upon their own shoulders, they either obtain relief by the forced adoption of a temperate regimen, or “fall into the hands of the undertaker.”