On the physiology of syphilitic infection / by Fessenden N. Otis.

  • Otis, Fessenden N. (Fessenden Nott), 1825-1900.
Date:
1872
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: On the physiology of syphilitic infection / by Fessenden N. Otis. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.

    5/30 (page 5)
    noinical influences. Nicholas Massa, about fifty years after- ; ward, claimed that it had its source in a metastasis of bilious matter from the liver to the genital organs. Paracelsus (in the same period) that a venereal miasm constituted the essen- tial element of the disease. In pursuance of this view, Cardi- nal Wolsey, in 1529, was publicly accused of having com- ; municated syphilis to King Henry the Eighth, by whispering in his ear. A little later, Fernel discovered that this dis- ease resulted ouly from contact. “The air and the breath cannot communicate it—contact with some of the matter which contains the poison, and serves as its vehicle, is neces- v sary,” wrote' Fernel, in 1548, and was thus first to enunciate . the doctrine of a virus, which view, upheld by Astruc (physician to Louis XV.) in 1736, fifty years later was con- firmed by the experiments of John Hunter upon his own person. Toward the end of the last century, it was claimed by Bru, a syphilographer of some distinction, that the virus was not present before contact, but that it was developed, like a spark of electricity, during coition. Bru was followed (1815) by Broussais, who wholly denied < the presence of a virus, and claimed that the disease was only due to irritation of the genital organs, following excessive and impure coition. In 1830, Ricord commenced a series of experimental inocu- 1 lations with the secretions of venereal lesions, which resulted J in promptly restoring the doctrine of virus, which has re- t‘j mained in almost undisputed possession of the field up to the i present day. The acceptance of the virus as a specific entity, lifted 1 syphilis out of the list of miasmatic diseases, and connected *| it definitely and permanently with the results of venereal con- | tact ; but the mystery of its origin was still unexplained, and | although various and ingenious theories were advanced from | time to time, chiefly associating it with bestial sexual com- $ merce, the elucidation of the virulent principle was unaccom- |i plished. It was only ascertained to reside in secretions which ]