THE 



POPULAR SCIENCE 



MONTHLY, 



NOVEMBER, 1913 



THE HISTOEY OE DIETETICS 



Bx JOHN BENJAMIN NICHOLS, M.D. 



WASHINGTON, D.C. 



THE manifold diversities in diet, the articles employed as food, the 

 manner of preparing food, customs of eating, etc., among different 

 peoples and at different times have been the outcome of fortuitous evolu- 

 tion, unguided and uninfluenced by definite physiologic principles. An 

 account of the development of such dietary practises would present 

 much of interest and would be included in a complete history of 

 dietetics; but it is far too large a subject to be considered here, and the 

 present paper will be limited to a brief presentation of the development 

 of the various lines of knowledge constituting the scientific basis of 

 dietetics, as it exists to-day. 



Inquiring and speculative minds in all ages have endeavored to 

 trace out the principles and laws governing diet. Prior to the modern 

 scientific era, that is, during the entire ancient and middle ages, there 

 was very little foundation of real knowledge on which a true science 

 of dietetics could be based. Only the crudest objective characteristics 

 of foodstuffs could be appreciated, such as the division of animal and 

 vegetable, liquid and solid, etc. Notwithstanding the want of any ade- 

 quate basis, from the time of Hippocrates a large proportion of medical 

 literature was devoted to the subject of dietetics, and a multitude of 

 treatises on food were presented characterized by chimerical speculation 

 and fine-spun theorizing. Mythical properties and dangers were ascribed 

 to different foodstuffs; rules were laid down in minute detail as to the 

 use or prohibition of various foods in different morbid conditions which 

 were without rational warrant; dietetic theories and systems were pro- 

 pounded which in the light of modern knowledge are seen to have been 

 grotesque; and the authorities expounded their doctrines with an em- 

 phasis and dogmatism paralleled only by their real ignc "ance of the 

 subject. Of all the mass of dietetic doctrine presented in l he ancient 



TOL. IiXXXIII.— 29 



