266 



MEMOIKS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. 



the energy of the alcohol was actually larger than that of the fats and carbohydrates which it 

 replaced, it did not equal them in protecting power. The difference is the more striking because 

 of the slightly larger average quantities of protein in the alcohol rations. On the other hand, 

 the differences between the amounts of protein and energy in the alcohol as compared with the 

 nonalcohol experiments are so slight as to imply only a slight inferiority of the alcohol in the 

 protection of protein. 



"While the alcohol was not isodynamically equal to the carbohydrates and fats in protecting 

 power, it would be going very far to deny that the experiments imply a positive protecting 

 action. Not only were the differences in favor of the protecting power of the carbohydrates and 

 fats as compared with the alcohol very small, but the quantity of energy supplied by the alcohol 

 was large. To claim that the alcohol has no protecting power would be to assume that the same 

 reduction of fats and carbohydrates in the rations without any replacement by alcohol would 

 have resulted in no greater differences in protein protection. This is in the highest degree 

 improbable. 



In this connection the results of experiments Nos. 22, 23, 24 above referred to are worthy 

 of consideration. With the normal ration, plus alcohol, there was a gain of 1.4 grams of protein 

 and 63 grams of fat per day; but when, in the period immediately following, the alcohol was 

 removed, there was a loss of 1.6 grams of protein and a gain of only 9 grams of fat. 



Experiments with J. W. S. — With this subject we have but one series of rest experiments. 

 This consisted of a preliminary period of 4 days, followed by four experimental periods, during 

 which the subject was in the respiration chamber. Throughout the preliminary and experi- 

 mental periods there was a uniform basal ration of ordinary food, supplying about 90 grams of 

 protein and 2,040 calories of energy. To this was added, in the preliminary period of 4 days, 

 commercial alcohol, furnishing about 500 calories of energy. The nitrogen in the urine during 

 the successive days was 12.2, 16, 19, 16.4 grams; that is to say, there was a marked increase of 

 protein catabolism during the whole period. The first three experiments proper were of 2 days 

 each. In the first of these periods commercial alcohol, in the second whisky, and in the third 

 brandy was added to the basal rations, the quantities being sufficient to furnish the same amount, 

 about 500 calories, of energy. The daily quantities of nitrogen in the urine were 17.4, 15.4, 

 14.7, 14.2, 13.8, and 14.4 grams; that is to say, the rise in nitrogen excretion continued through 

 the first day of the first period; thereafter it fell. During the fourth period of 3 days the basal 

 ration was given without the alcohol. The nitrogen excretion was 14.5. L6.2, 15.4 grams, thus 

 showing an increase again. The natural inference is that with this subject, who had always been 

 an abstainer, the rise in nitrogen excretion at first was due to the alcohol. The very evident fall 

 after the fifth day implies that the action of alcohol in increasing the nitrogen was transitory, 

 and that it had passed away at the end of the third period. The increase of nitrogen excretion 

 in the fourth period was apparently due to the reduction of the ration by the removal of the 

 alcohol. 



The average gains and losses of protein and fat for the separate periods may be tabulated as 

 follows: 



We thus have a gradual change from a loss of nitrogen to equilibrium and positive gain 

 with the alcohol, and on its removal a positive loss. With the fat there is a constant gain with 

 the alcohol and marked loss on its removal. 



While it would be unwise to generalize from a single series of experiments, the indications 

 here point clearly toward three conclusions: (1) The alcohol at first caused an increase of 



