TEE ALCOHOL MOTIVE 253 



esting, however, to call attention to the fact, especially since a few- 

 physiologists still claim that under some circumstances it may act as a 

 stimulant to certain bodily organs, that if alcohol were a stimulant, 

 this would not, after all, afford any evidence that it plays a useful part 

 in human economy. A stimulant as such adds nothing to human 

 economy, whether such economy is considered from the standpoint of 

 the race or of the individual. It offers no gain in the long run and 

 could be of no real advantage in the struggle for existence. A stim- 

 ulant can be serviceable only in emergency cases and under abnormal 

 conditions and as such can not serve as an explanation for a desire 

 extending to nearly all people in all periods of history. 



4. The supposition may be made that alcohol increases muscular 

 efficiency, at least temporarily, and that the desire for it may be 

 explained in this way, but the experimental evidence forbids this view. 

 Many series of experiments have been made by Warren, Prey, Schnyder, 

 Destree, Tavernari, Kraepelin, Fere, Partridge, Eivers and others, 

 using the ergograph and other forms of dynamometer, to determine the 

 effect of small doses of alcohol upon muscular power and efficiency. 

 These experiments have shown that, as the result of small, or so-called 

 normal doses of alcohol, there is a slight initial increase of muscular 

 power followed by a decrease, so that on the whole the results reveal a 

 loss rather than a gain in efficiency. With an increase in the size of 

 the doses, the decrease in efficiency is greater. Later experiments 

 carried out by Eivers and Webber, using a control drink so that the 

 subjects did not know when alcohol had been administered, showed no 

 initial increase of power whatever, Eivers believing that the increase 

 shown in other experiments was due to suggestion. There seems some 

 ground for believing that alcohol, while it does not increase muscular 

 efficiency, shortens reaction-time at first and facilitates the liberation 

 of energy. This may account to some extent for the feeling of in- 

 creased efficiency which follows the ingestion of alcohol. If it be true 

 that it shortens reaction-time and facilitates the liberation of energy, 

 it still does not appear that this would offer any explanation for the 

 world-wide desire for it. It has not been shown that any decided 

 advantage accrues from the shortening of reaction-time or the quicker 

 liberation of energy. The normal reaction-time and the normal lib- 

 eration of energy would seem in the long run to be more advantageous. 

 Kraepelin's conclusion is that the laborer who gains his livelihood by 

 the strength of his arm destroys by the use of alcohol the very founda- 

 tion of his efficiency. The experiments of Hodge, with retrieving dogs 

 showed that the dogs given alcohol did about half as much work as the 

 normal animals. The experiments of Durig in mountain climbing, 

 with and without alcohol, showed that moderate doses of alcohol resulted 

 in a loss of about 20 per cent, in efficiency. 



5. Alcohol, again, does not increase mental efficiency. The experi- 



