FIRST SCIENTIFIC RECOGNITION OF THE PRINCIPLES OF ECONOMIC NUTRITION OUTLINED IN “GLUTTON OR EPICURE”
[With the exception of a brief review of Glutton or Epicure, by Dr. Joseph Blumfield, of London, published in The Lancet, no scientific or professional recognition of the principles of an economic nutrition attained by means of thorough buccal digestion was gained until issue of the following paper by Dr. Ernest Van Someren, of Venice, Italy.
The previous autumn and winter had been devoted to experiments by Dr. Van Someren and the writer, in co-operation with Dr. Professor Leonardi, for twelve years Professor of Chemistry in the University of Pavia, Italy. In the spring and summer of 1901 the field of experiments was changed to Mendel Pass, bei Bozen, Süd Tirol, Austria, and related to endurance work in climbing mountains and bicycle runs among the Dolomites.
Dr. Van Someren’s paper attracted the attention of Sir Michael Foster, Professor of Physiology at the University of Cambridge, England, and Permanent Honorary President of the International Congress of Physiologists.
Professor Foster entered into correspondence with Dr. Van Someren, and this was followed by an invitation to Dr. Van Someren and the writer to attend the Congress which was to convene in Turin, Italy, during the month of September following. At the Congress Dr. Van Someren presented a technical thesis on the probable causes of the economy attained, and gave a demonstration of the movement of his Swallowing Reflex in relation to food in the process of liquefaction and preliminary digestion in the mouth.
Following the Congress we received an invitation to visit Cambridge, England, and submit to tests of nitrogenous measurements in the Physiological Laboratory of the University, under the direction of Dr. F. Gowland Hopkins; and also to an examination of the bacterial flora incident to the nitrogenous estimations, under the direction of Dr. George H. F. Nuttall.
The report of the experiments in the Chemical-Physiological Department is given in the “Note” of Sir Michael Foster, which follows Dr. Van Someren’s paper, but the bacterial examination was not carried far enough to warrant a scientific report, owing to difficulty of obtaining, at the time, sufficient data.—Horace Fletcher.]