M. Stern[123] has shown, in an elaborate memoir, that such antiseptics as calomel, salol, [Greek: b]-naphthol, naphthaline, and camphor, when administered in quantities compatible with health, do not disinfect the digestive tube at all. More recently M. Strasburger[124] has shown that when naphthaline has been given in quantities sufficient to impart its odour to the fæces, the intestinal microbes, so far from being diminished, are even increased in numbers. On the other hand, after meals consisting of milk to which there has been added an antiseptic in the proportion of a quarter of a gram to the litre, the intestinal microbes are really reduced in number. Strasburger obtained his best results with tanocol. Two persons who used, according to this method, three to six grams of tanacol per day, displayed a notable reduction in quantity of the intestinal flora. Strasburger’s conclusion was that “the attempt to destroy the intestinal microbes by the use of chemical agents has little chance of success.” It cannot be denied that under special circumstances it is possible to decrease the number of microbes, especially in the small intestine. But this result is small and may be followed by the contrary effect, for the natural means of defence of the intestine against microbes are weakened, and the intestine itself may be harmed more than the microbes. Strasburger, moreover, is no convinced advocate of the use of purgatives. The diminution of the sulpho-conjugate ethers in the urine, which certainly may follow the use of purgatives, does not necessarily indicate reduced putrefaction in the intestine, but may point only to a lessened absorption of the bacterial products. Such an interpretation is supported by an observed fact; in the case of a dog belonging to Strasburger, which had a fistula of the small intestine, the diarrhœa induced by calomel was accompanied by an indubitable increase in the total quantity of intestinal microbes. Strasburger thinks that the most favourable results can be obtained by aiding the intestine in the discharge of its normal function. If it can be brought to digest the food more completely, there is the less pabulum left for the microbes. A similar result can be reached by lowering the amount of food taken, and to this course the beneficial effects of starvation in acute diseases of the intestine may be attributed. The general conclusion, reached after many experiments on the disinfection of the intestine, is unfavourable. Very little is to be expected from the method. None the less I cannot regard the matter as definitely settled. Cohendy has investigated the effect on the intestinal flora of thymol which was administered in several cases with the object of destroying parasites. From nine to twelve grammes of thymol were administered to each patient in the space of three days, and there was a notable antiseptic effect, Cohendy believing that the quantity of microbes had been reduced to a thirteenth.