150 INFLUENCE OF FOOD PRESERVATIVES ON HEALTH. 



41.5 per cent, in the preservative period 43.8, and in the after period 

 47. 4. Of the total fat in the food there appears in the feces in the 

 fore period 3.4, in the preservative period 4, and in the after period 

 5.4. Of the total calories in the food there appears in the feces in the 

 fore period 3.6 percent, in the preservative period 4.1, and in the after 

 period 5.2. 



In this comparison of the three members of the table who completed 

 the entire course, the most striking point which is brought out is the 

 increase in the nutritive elements of the food unabsorbed during 

 the after period. While there is a marked tendency during the pre- 

 servative period, as compared with the fore period, to diminish the 

 absorption of these nutrient elements, it is not nearly so marked as 

 the decrease in the absorptive power manifest during the after period. 

 It is not possible to say that these disturbances are related directly to 

 the administration of the preservative. It seems, however, only fair 

 to assume that the decreased percentage of absorption is directly 

 related to the increase of the solid matter in the feces. For instance, 

 more food, measured by its calorific power, is administered in the fore 

 period than in the preservative period, namely, 3,365 calories in the 

 fore period, 3,308 calories in the preservative period, and in after 

 period 3,356. With the same degree of absorption there would have 

 been less dry matter in the feces in the preservative period than in the 

 fore period. In point of fact, however, there is more dry matter 

 an average of 3.6 grams more corresponding to the decrease in the 

 absorption of the nitrogenous foods and the decrease in the absorption 

 of the calorific elements of the foods. It is of course easily under- 

 stood that during a part of the after period the influence of the pre- 

 servative per se continues, because it requires practically the whole of 

 the after period to eliminate the traces of the preservative from the 

 system. There appears in this case to be a still more profound dis- 

 turbance than can be traced to this source. There is one explanation 

 of these phenomena which is offered tentatively, but without any asser- 

 tion of its accuracy. It is this: In the administration of this preserv- 

 ative the foreign body which it represents has a double effect. In the 

 first place it may excite the digestive functions to renewed activity in 

 order to eliminate the foreign element, while at the same time it may 

 preserve a portion of the food from the operations of digestion. If 

 the degree of excitation is less than the degree of preservation the 

 total effect would be to decrease slightly the amount of the food elements 

 absorbed, as indicated by the summary of the data. In the case under 

 consideration, this ingestion of the foreign substance continues for a 

 long while, namely, from May 2 to June 20, inclusive, a period of fifty 

 da} 7 s. The withdrawal of this artificial excitation would naturally 

 cause, if the above assumption be true, a depression in the excitation 

 of the glands furnishing the digestive elements. This would also 



