Page:Treatise on poisons in relation to medical jurisprudence, physiology, and the practice of physic (IA treatiseonpoison00chriuoft).pdf/38

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page needs to be proofread.

and the poison of the viper may prove fatal to a man through a wound in almost invisible doses, while the whole poison of six vipers may be swallowed by so small a creature as a blackbird, with complete impunity.[1] Differences in the absorbing power of the tissues cannot explain these facts.

The only rational way of accounting for them is by supposing that a part of the poison is decomposed,—the change being greatest where absorption is slowest and the power of assimilation strongest, namely, in the stomach,—and least where absorption is quickest and assimilation almost wanting, namely, in a wound. This explanation derives support from the different effects of change of tissue on poisons of the different kingdoms. Mineral poisons are least, and animal poisons are most, affected in their action by differences of tissue, while vegetable poisons hold the middle place:—an arrangement which coincides with the respective difficulty of decomposition among mineral, vegetable, and animal substances generally, whether under physical or under vital processes.[2]

6. With respect to differences arising from difference of organ, these will, of course, be partly attributable to differences in tissue, but not altogether. For example, in the case of the pure corrosives or irritants, the injury caused will depend for its danger on the importance of the organ to the general economy of the body: Inflammation caused by a local poison in the stomach will be more quickly fatal than that excited in the intestines only; and such a poison may act violently on the external parts without materially impairing the general health.

7. Habit and Idiosyncrasy.—The remarks to be made under the present head are important in a medico-legal point of view: for they show how one man may be poisoned by a substance generally harmless, and another not harmed by a substance usually poisonous.

The tendency of idiosyncrasy is generally to increase the activity of poisons, or even to render some substances deleterious which are commonly harmless.

The effect of opium in medicinal doses is commonly pleasant and salutary; but in some individuals it produces disagreeable and even dangerous effects. Calomel, which in moderate doses is for the most part a mild laxative or sialagogue, will cause in some people, even in the dose of a few grains, violent salivation, ulceration of the mouth, nay, fatal gangrene. On the other hand, a few substances, which to most people are actively poisonous, have on some individuals comparatively little effect. There are extremely few poisons, however, in regard to which this kind of idiosyncrasy is well-established and prominent. Mercury and alcohol are examples. The compounds of mercury, which in moderate quantity are mildly laxative or sialagogue to most people, but to some persons dangerously poisonous in very small doses, would, on the contrary, appear in

  1. Giornale di Fisica, ix. 458.
  2. These views regarding the decomposition of poisons, were suggested to me in 1823 by my friend Dr. Coindet, Junior, of Geneva.