PARASITES.
INTRODUCTION.
No person can derive advantage from the study of parasites unless the subject be approached in a right frame of mind. In other words, the student of helminthology must, as a primary discipline, dispossess himself of all preconceived opinions whatsoever, and in an attitude of child-like simplicity seek truth for its own sake. Unless the mind be absolutely free and unfettered it cannot rightly interpret the facts of this peculiar department of biological science. Those students who are nervously anxious to reconcile the conclusions of modern science with the ideas of their forefathers are certain to remain just as ignorant of the true value and significance of nature-teachings as all their fathers were.
Whether dealing with the external or internal forms, the study of parasites of man and animals is practically one of boundless extent; and there is probably no department of knowledge, possessing an equal value in relation to the welfare of man and beast, that is so thoroughly misunderstood by those who are directly concerned in the appreciation of its revelations. This has arisen from a total misconception as to cause and effect. Most people, not excluding even the votaries of the healing art, following tradition, regard the internal parasites or entozoa as creatures either directly resulting from certain diseased conditions of their hosts or as organisms which would not have existed if their bearers had been perfectly healthy. Nothing can be more absurd. Such a conclusion is utterly at variance with all logical deduction from known facts. It is, however, quite on a par with multitudes of other popular delusions which, in spite of the advance of science, will probably never become wholly eradicated from the public mind. People who hold these notions either cannot or do not desire to reject a view which has for them a dominating power almost equal to that of any known religious dogma. In conversation I have repeatedly noticed this to be the case. These people are the victims of educated ignorance and they will never allow that parasites are natural developments, accomplishing ends or parts of the orderly mystery which reigns everywhere. Some of then still cling to the creed that the presence of parasites, of internal ones at least, betokens evidence of Divine disfavor; and their minds are troubled with all sorts of distressing and childish conceptions. In the present age one would have thought that such ridiculous ideas could not be seriously maintained; but instead of being relegated to the limbo of similar “old wives’ fables” they dominate the opinions of thousands of our so-called educated people. The genuine searcher after truth does not need to be told that all preconceptions of this order hopelessly obscure the mental vision. They operate to render a just and adequate understanding of the science of helminthology impossible. The biologist may say what he lists, but he knows perfectly well that the superstitious mind will continue to ignore the precious and elevating results of scientific research, and that it will perseveringly continue to persuade itself that internal worms, parasites, and entozoa, of whatever kind, belong to the category of “plagues” liable to be distributed as special punishments for human wrong-doing.
As remarked in my previous treatise, the best way of studying the entozoa is to regard them as collectively forming a peculiar fauna, destined to occupy an equally peculiar territory. That territory is the wide-spread domain of the interior of the bodies of man and animals. Each bearer or “host” may be viewed as a continent, and each part or viscus of his body may be regarded as a district. Each district has its special attractions for particular parasitic forms; yet, at the same time, neither the district nor the continent are suitable as permanent resting-places for the invader. None of the internal parasites “continue in one stay;” all have a tendency to roam; migration is the soul of their prosperity; change of residence the essential of their existence; whilst a blockade in the interior soon terminates in degeneration and death. I repeat it. The entozoa constitute a specialised fauna. What our native country is to ourselves, the bodies of animals are to them. To attack, to invade, to infest, is their legitimate prerogative. Their organisation, habits, and economy are expressly fashioned to this end. How remarkable and complex is their structure, and how peculiar, diverse, and varied are their ways and wanderings, the contents of this volume will, I trust, sufficiently explain. The puerile horror which even some scientific persons affect to display in regard to the subject is altogether out of place. To the rightly balanced mind the study of these much abused “worms” is just as attractive as any other section of zoology. Helminthology opens up to our view many of the strangest biological phenomena of which the human mind can take cognisance; whilst a profound and extended knowledge of the subject, in all its bearings, is calculated to secure to the community a rich practical reward by enabling us to do effectual battle with not a few of the many ills of life to which our flesh is heir.
Further on the general advantages to be derived from the study of parasites I cannot here dilate, and it becomes the less necessary that I should do so, since I have entered upon the subject very fully elsewhere. The character of the present work, moreover, imposes brevity. If the plan which I now propose to follow should not be deemed altogether satisfactory from the purely zoological standpoint, it will nevertheless have the advantage of simplicity and novelty; and knowing full well the difficulties that must surround any attempt to give a perfect classification of the entozoa, considered as a natural group, I feel sure that my helminthological friends will credit me with exercising a wise discretion in selecting the simplest available method of arrangement. My plan, therefore, is to devote separate sections of this work to the parasites of the different classes of vertebrated animals, including man, treating of the various species in regular succession. This arrangement is merely one of convenience and has no reference whatever to conceptions of zoological equivalency as variously interpreted and maintained by authors and investigators. The parasitic groups will be taken up in the following order, quite irrespective of their relative importance, and also without any attempt to treat each group with equal fulness. In the matter of recent literature only will the present record and summary make any approach toward completeness, my hope being to render this treatise indispensable and trustworthy as a ready means of reference.
I. Flukes. Trematoda.—This group embraces several families of parenchymatous worms. The various species exhibit one or more suckers, which the older naturalists regarded as so many mouths or perforations. Hence the ordinal title. The term fluke is of Saxon origin, meaning anything flat. Thus, it has been applied to sole-fish or flounders, to the flattened halves of the tail of cetaceans, to the blades of anchors, and so forth. Although the common liver fluke is flat, many species of the order are round, biconvex, or even filiform organisms. I recognise six families:—Monostomidæ, Distomidæ, Amphistomidæ, Tristomidæ, Polystomidæ, and Gyrodactylidæ. Most of the species are entozoal; but many adhere to the surface of the body of piscine hosts.
II. Tapeworms. Cestoda.—This comprises not only the tapeworms, but also the measles and other bladder-worms or cystic Entozoa of the old authors (Cystica). The Greek word kestos means a band or girdle; hence the ordinal term above given. The bladder-worms, including Hydatids, Cysticerci, &c., are the larval stages of growth of various tapeworms. The further reduction of this order into sub-orders or families requires careful attention. At present we have Tæniadæ, Acanthotæniadæ, Dibothridæ (= Bothriocephalidæ), Diphyllobothridæ, Tetrarhynchidæ, and Tetraphyllobothridæ. All the genera and species are entozoal. The proposal to separate the snouted or proboscidiform tapeworms (Rhynchotæniadæ) from those in which the rostellum is absent (Arhynchotæniadæ) does not recommend itself to my judgment.