TYPHOID FEVEK. 185 



"It is extremely probable/' or "the presence of a previ- 

 ous or existing typhoid infection may, for diagnostic 

 purposes, be practically considered as established." 

 "May be reasonably assumed/' so and so. Dr. Cowie's 

 paper says thirty-seven years after the disease. 



If obliged to depend on the Widal test, can the bac- 

 teriologists decide whether a suspected case is or is not 

 typhoid fever? It would seem as though Mrs. Mary 

 Moss Baker Glover Patterson G-. Eddy was correct when 

 she said : "The nothingness of nothing is plain." 



What a contrast it would be for bacteriology to 

 make a clear positive statement, just one. Something 

 it has never yet done. Why? Simply because they 

 are dealing with theory. Admitting that there may 

 be some value in the Widal test, the fact still remains 

 that the test or reaction does not generally take place 

 until about two weeks after the disease is established. 

 Who is satisfied to wait two weeks? 



H elimination has been thorough and antiseptics 

 have been given in sufficiently large doses, in most cases 

 prompt recovery will follow in a few days. The writer 

 knows this from experience. The reason is that in 

 most cases typhoid is not present, and if it were, the 

 above treatment, with proper hygienic surroundings, 

 would cut most cases short. 



Take a case of genuine typhoid fever, the bacteriolo- 

 gist takes a drop of water from the well, places it under 

 the microscope, and finds it loaded with germs. Does 

 that prove the germs caused the disease ? No ; it only 

 proves that the water was full of decomposing matter 

 which furnished a medium or food upon which germs 



