HISTORICAL REVIEW 3 



Albu (1897), Wang (1899) and Belonowsky (1907a) also were unable 

 to establish any direct relationship. 



Intestinal antisepsis has received considerable attention. Bouchard 

 (1887) may be regarded as the pioneer in this field. He administered 

 charcoal, naphthalene and iodoform internally, and observed a reduc- 

 tion of toxicity of the stools and urine. Wassilieff (1882) claimed that 

 calomel produced a diminution in the putrefactive products of the feces 

 of dogs. Baumann (1886) also noticed that calomel was effective in 

 reducing the ethereal sulphates in the urine. Sucksdorff (1886) con- 

 cluded that quinine and naphthalene reduced the number of intestinal 

 bacteria. Miiller (1887) and Bartoschewitch (1893) noticed a dis- 

 appearance of ethereal sulphates after the administration of calomel, 

 and Fiirbringer (1887) found that this agent materially reduced the 

 number of intestinal microorganisms. Kumawaga (1888) reported a 

 reduction of bacteria in the proportion of 37 to 1 through the use of 

 acetanilid in the dog. Salkowski (1889) obtained a considerable drop 

 in the number of bacteria in the intestine of a dog which had received 

 chloroform water. Sehrwald (1889) also obtained positive results with 

 naphthalene, and Griffith (1895) and Williams (1895) used chlorine in 

 the treatment of typhoid patients with apparently excellent results. 

 Rovighi (1892) employed turpentine, camphor, menthol and boric acid 

 with moderate success. 



Morax (1886) could not confirm Baumann's conclusions, and main- 

 tained that the apparent diminution of ethereal sulphates was due to 

 rapid removal of the putrefactive products through active peristalsis. 

 Stieff (1889) and Biernacki (1892) arrived at the same conclusions 

 as Morax. Schuetz (1901) could demonstrate no favorable influence 

 through the use of antiseptics. On the contrary, he observed an in- 

 crease of intestinal bacteria after the administration of calomel. Von 

 Mieczkowski (1902) pronounced bismuth, silver nitrate, tannopin and 

 beta-naphthol as valueless, but did secure a reduction after the use of 

 menthol. Strasburger (1903) obtained negative results with naphtha- 

 lene, thymol, silver nitrate and beta-naphthol. Salicylic acid, however, 

 caused some reduction. Schonenborn (1903) found that naphthalene, 

 itrol and thymol increased the bacteria, while salicylic acid mixed with 

 the food diminished the number. Miiller (1898), after several years of 

 observation, is of the opinion that disinfection of the alimentary canal 

 with drugs is hardly possible, and that there are no useful intestinal 

 antiseptics. 



Hoffman (1906) showed that iodoform when given by mouth is an 

 effective disinfectant and decreases the number of bacteria in the feces. 

 Herter (1907) noted that in certain instances salicylates, aspirin and 

 salol exerted some action in decreasing the output of indican, but ulti- 

 mately reached the conclusion that most of the so-called intestinal 

 antiseptics do very little good in effecting diminution of the putrefactive 

 organisms of the intestine. Feigen (1908) used calomel, magnesium 



