20. Bleeding has been charged with being a weakening remedy. I grant that it is so, and in this, its merit chiefly consists. The excessive morbid action of the blood-vessels must be subdued in part, in a fever, before stimulating remedies can be given with safety or advantage. Now this is usually attempted by depleting medicines, to be mentioned hereafter, or it is left to time and nature, all of which are frequently either deficient, or excessive in their operations; whereas bleeding, by suddenly reducing the morbid action of the blood-vessels to a wished-for point of debility, saves a great and unnecessary waste of excitability, and thus prepares the body for the exhibition of such cordial remedies as are proper to remove the debility which predisposed to the fever.
21. It has been said that bleeding renders the habitual use of it necessary to health and life. This objection to blood-letting is founded upon an ignorance of the difference between the healthy, and morbid action of the blood-vessels. Where blood is drawn in health, such a relaxation is induced in the blood-vessels, as to favour the formation of plethora, which may require habitual bleeding to remove it; but where blood is drawn only in the inflammatory state of fever, the blood-vessels are reduced from a morbid degree of strength to that which is natural, in which state no predisposition to plethora is created, and no foundation laid for periodical blood-letting. But there are cases which require even this evil, to prevent a greater. Thus we cure a strangulated hernia, when no fever attends, by the most profuse bleeding. The plethora and predisposition to disease which follow it are trifling, compared with preventing certain and sudden death.
22. Bleeding has been accused of bringing on an intermitting fever. This is so far from being an objection to it, that it should be considered as a new argument in its favour; for when it produces that state of fever, it converts a latent, and perhaps a dangerous disease, into one that is obvious to the senses, and under the dominion of medicine. Nor is it an objection to blood-letting, that, when used in an inflammatory intermittent, it sometimes changes it into a continual fever. An instance of the good effects of this change occurred in the Pennsylvania hospital, in an obstinate tertian, in the year 1804. The continual fever, which followed the loss of blood, was cured in a few days, and by the most simple remedies.
23. It has been said that bleeding, more especially where it is copious, predisposes to effusions of serum in the lungs, chest, bowels, limbs, and brain. In replying to this objection to bleeding, in my public lectures, I have addressed my pupils in the following language: “Ask the poor patients who come panting to the door of our hospital, with swelled legs and hard bellies, every fall, whether they have been too copiously bled, and they will all tell you, that no lancet has come near their arms. Ask the parents who still mourn the loss of children who have died, in our city, of the internal dropsy of the brain, whether they were destroyed by excessive blood-letting? If the remembrance of the acute sufferings which accompanied their sickness and death will permit these parents to speak, they will tell you, that every medicine, except bleeding, had been tried to no purpose in their children's diseases. Go to those families in which I have practised for many years, and inquire, whether there is a living or a dead instance of dropsy having followed, in any one of them, the use of my lancet? Let the undertakers and grave-diggers bear witness against me, if I have ever, in the course of my practice, conveyed the body of a single dropsical patient into their hands, by excessive blood-letting? No. Dropsies, like abscesses and gangrenous eruptions upon the skin, arise, in most cases, from the want of sufficient bleeding in inflammatory diseases. Debility, whether induced by action or abstraction, seldom disposes to effusion. Who ever heard of dropsy succeeding famine? And how rarely do we see it accompany the extreme debility of old age?”
“If ever bleeding kills,” says Botallus, either directly or indirectly, through the instrumentality of other diseases, “it is not from its excess, but because it is not drawn in a sufficient quantity, or at a proper time[53].” And, again, says this excellent writer, “One hundred thousand men perish from the want of blood-letting, or from its being used out of time, to one who perishes from too much bleeding, prescribed by a physician[54].”
It is remarkable, that the dread of producing a dropsy by bleeding, is confined chiefly to its use in malignant fevers; for the men who urge this objection to it, do not hesitate to draw four or five quarts of blood in the cure of the pleurisy. The habitual association of the lancet with this disease, has often caused me to rejoice when I have heard a patient complain of a pain in his side, in a malignant fever. It insured to me his consent to the frequent use of the lancet, and it protected me, when it was used unsuccessfully, from the clamours of the public, for few people censure copious bleeding in a pleurisy.
24. Against blood-letting it has been urged, that the Indians of our country cure their inflammatory fevers without it. To relieve myself from the distressing obloquy to which my use of this remedy formerly exposed me, I have carefully sought for, and examined their remedies for those fevers, with a sincere desire to adopt them; but my inquiries have convinced me, that they are not only disproportioned to the habits and diseases of civilized life, but that they are far less successful than blood-letting, in curing the inflammatory fevers which occur among the Indians themselves.
25. Evacuating remedies of another kind have been said to be more safe than bleeding, and equally effectual, in reducing the inflammatory state of fever. I shall enumerate each of these evacuating remedies, and then draw a comparative view of their effects with blood-letting. They are,
I. Vomits.