75 
Vienna—evidently some American student had left his mark.* Moreover 
men smoked slowly and in moderation and spat very little. Any of you who 
have travelled in the Old World know the difference in cleanliness between 
European cities and our own. On getting back home I saw things I never 
really had noticed before, especially the sort of air we breathe habitually. 
In 1900 I took up a systematic study of dusty air and prevalent ill 
health, and gradually enlarged the scope of inquiry to the domestication 
and urbanization of man. What this means can in a general way be seen 
from my various papers before the Academy. This period from 1900 to 
1915 may be divided into subperiods: 
The period from 1900 to 1906 may be characterized as one of disgust 
and contempt for the tobacco user, in the light of the harm he does to others, 
especially to women and children. I held to the old belief that men smoked 
(and drank) because they wanted to. But I found that to neglect the tobacco 
users means to get little data, and beginning with 1906 I gave some men and 
boys considerable attention, trying to find out why tobacco had such a hold 
and why some could readily discontinue the habit and others only with the 
greatest difficulty, if at all. Naturally one is apt to pity the man who sees 
the harm the tobacco habit does to others and yet can not quit, to whom 
tobacco is a sedative. Some of these men found that by using it ‘“‘medici- 
nally’’ a very small quantity sufficed. I believe if there were a high tax on 
tobacco it would be used very sparingly; old habitues could get along with a 
small quantity. 
Up to the close of 1905 I had been accustomed to call patients who reacted 
to bad air Dust Victims. Then a bright woman said, ‘‘Why not call them 
Tobaceo Victims? The tobacco user is the one who is responsible for air 
pollution, directly or indirectly.’’ I kept a record for the year 1906 and at 
least every other patient was what may be called a Tobacco Victim. This 
included those dust victims who used tobacco, who had ill health on account 
of infected air. I trust you see the distinction. 
In time one gets all sorts of data and all sorts of reasons why a man uses 
*How do you know it was an American student? I was asked after the paper was . 
read. I did not know; I ony inferred, for I had not seen a single continental medical 
student chew and spit. A few days later I spoke to an observant German physician 
about this. The moment I mentionea ‘‘in front of the medical school,’’ he interrupted, 
“Some American student_dia that; German students don’t chew tobacco; the man 
who would chew and spit_woula be ostracized.’’ He thus confirmed my own opinion. 
