MEDICAL.
Orient asks us for “a method of permanently removing fat from her nose.” But as she says “sometimes it disappears altogether, and at other times it becomes very thick,” we can tell her for certain that her nose does not get swollen from a deposit of fat. When fat deposits in the nose, it comes to stay. Let her use an ointment of calamine or ichthiol, and attend to her digestion.
Madge.—Colour blindness is an incurable condition. It is congenital and frequently hereditary. There are various grades of the affection. The three primary colours (physiological) are red, green, and violet, and there is a separate set of nervous cells to appreciate each of these primary colours. In colour blindness one or more of these sets of cells are absent. Thus colour-blind persons are blind to red, to green, or to violet, or to two or all of these. Total colour blindness is uncommon. Very frequently the subjects of colour blindness are quite ignorant of their condition.
Worried.—Read the answer to “Orient.” Though indigestion is the commonest cause of red noses, there are other causes such as diseases of the nose and feeble circulation. In your case undoubtedly the chief factor at work is the last. You should dress yourself warmly, and always wear a veil when you go out for a walk. Take a nutritious but easily digestible diet with plenty of warm milk. Always wash in warm water. Locally you may use the ichthiol ointment or a little cold cream.
Our Girls’ Brother.—The question of the intermarrying of cousins is a very important one, and deserves a little consideration. The whole question turns upon hereditary tendency. Let us take an example. Miss Smith is going to marry Mr. Jones. The woman brings to the union the hereditary tendencies and the family peculiarities of the Smith family. Mr. Jones brings those of the Jones family. The future Master Jones will inherit the tendencies of both his parents, and his mind may be represented as partaking of the following, “self-Jones-Smith.” That is to say, he has inherited something from the Jones family and something from the Smith family to add to his own original self, which, of course, is far the most important item. But suppose these persons who are going to marry are cousins: here there is only one family’s tendencies to be inherited, so their offsprings will get a little less to inherit, but the tendencies which they do inherit, being derived from both parents, will be very much more marked. The result of the constant intermarriage of relatives is to strengthen the family tendencies, and to render the minds of the future generations one-sided but not, if the family is a healthy one, incompetent. So there is little or nothing against the intermarriage of cousins once or perhaps twice. And there would be but little against constant intermarriage in a family which was absolutely healthy, which in the human race is practically impossible. Now suppose, in a family, one member becomes insane, a misfortune which may happen to anybody; the future generations from that family will be slightly more liable to become insane than are ordinary people. If the brother of the man who went insane married a perfectly healthy girl, the tendency of their child to become insane diminishes, because one of his parents brings a good family history. But if this brother marries one of his relations, their child is far more likely to become insane, because both his parents have bad family histories. The long and short of the matter is this; there is no reason, from a medical point of view, why cousins should not marry if both are healthy, and if their family history is good.
Massie.—We can understand your alarm when the surgeon suggested that he should “cut you open to see what is the matter with you.” But you did very wrong in refusing to give your consent to the procedure. It is exceedingly common to open the abdomen to discover the cause of obscure diseases. Many persons may think that it is not justifiable to perform an operation merely to satisfy curiosity. If this is the way you put it, we agree with you. It is criminal to perform an operation merely to satisfy curiosity! But such a thing is never done. We open the abdomen to find out the actual cause of obscure diseases in that locality; but we do so, not so much to establish a diagnosis as to see if the disease is capable of removal. Nowadays abdominal section of this kind is a trivial manœuvre, and although there is a certain amount of risk in the procedure, it is nothing when compared with the danger of allowing a progressive disease to run its course unchecked. From your letter, we take it that the surgeon thinks that you have something obstructing your bowels—he does not know what. It is very seldom possible to tell what these diseases really are without exploring. He asks you for your consent to let him open your abdomen, see what the disease is, remove it if possible, and if not, to express a definite opinion upon it. You say, “What a terrible thing it would be, if he cut me and found nothing!” It would certainly be a pity, but, after all, what better news can you wish for?
[Transcriber’s Note: The following changes have been made to this text.
Page 483: gratitute to gratitude—“sincere gratitude”.]