THE BENEFICIAL EFFECTS OF TOBACCO
ITS DISINFECTING ACTION. PROTECTION AGAINST INFECTIOUS DISEASE.
PSYCHOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF SMOKING.
THE BENEFICIAL QUALITIES OF TOBACCO
In the previous chapters the possible harmful effects of using tobacco
have been dealt with at length. In this chapter we shall deal shortly with
some positive beneficial effects.
There is very little doubt that tobacco is a strongly protective agent
against infection from disease. Its germicidal qualities are well-known
and recognized. It is now recognized by medical writers that the mouth is
one of the principal, if not the principal channel of infection for many
infective diseases. The cavities of the teeth are the breeding places of
hosts of pathogenic bacteria, of which there are about 100 different
varieties arising from decaying food and other sources. These destructive
agents, many of them highly pathogenic, easily find their way from the
mouth through various channels to the inside of the body. Many infective
organisms floating in the air are drawn into the mouth in the act of
respiration and this is a common method of falling a victim to contagion.
The effect of tobacco juice on the bacteria of the human mouth was
investigated by Dr. W. D. Fullerton and is reported by him in the
_Cleveland Med. Journal_ 1912, page 585.
In his experiments Fullerton used tobacco juice obtained from the human
mouth by chewing plug tobacco. He also used a solution of smoke obtained
from a well seasoned pipe. These were first thoroughly sterilized in order
to obtain a pure natural mixture of tobacco and saliva. Cultures of
well-known species of bacteria were made using every laboratory precaution
so as to obtain accurate results. Specimens of these bacterial cultures
were then submitted to the action of the tobacco juice. It was found that
exposure for one hour killed or rendered innocuous 15 to 98 per cent of
the bacteria; exposure for 24 hours acted similarly on from 84 to 100%.
Dr. Fullerton gives his opinion, from his results, that it seems that a
pipeful of tobacco was more toxic to bacteria than one chew; but chewing
tends to loosen retained food particles, foci of bacteria, etc., and much
of this is ejected from the mouth. Fullerton's work agreed very well with
the results obtained by other workers in the same line of investigation.
In Miller's _Micro-organisms of the Human Mouth_, p. 246, it is stated
that the organisms of the mouth lead only a miserable existence in a
mixture of an infusion of tobacco, sugar and saliva; and that the smoke of
the last one-third or the first one-fourth of a Colorado Claro cigar
sterilized ten cubic centimeters of beef extract solution which had been
richly inoculated with bacteria from decayed teeth. Arnold, _Lancet_
(London, 1907) reports similar experiences with some of the most virulent
types of infective bacteria.
Both nicotine and its derivative pyridine as well as the tarry oils
resulting from tobacco distillation are strong and effective
disinfectants; and formaldehyde, one of the most powerful germicides
known, is so formed. Trillat, _Annales de l'Institut Pasteur_ (Paris),
Vol. 19, p. 722, shows that 100 grams of pipe tobacco will yield .063
grams and 100 grams weight of cigar .118 grams of formaldehyde. Also that
a dilution of 1/1000 formaldehyde is germicidal to all bacteria although
it has very little deleterious effects on man.
As far as can be ascertained there has not been very much investigation
for the purpose of demonstrating the actual results of clinical experience
regarding the antiseptic qualities of tobacco in the case of smokers, but
facts, so far as they have been recorded, bear out the experiments. Rideal
_Disinfection and Preservation of Food_ (London and New York, 1903) states
that the investigations of Tessarini showed that tobacco smoke passed over
the organisms of human cholera and pneumonia killed them in from 10 to 30
minutes. He also states that the Cigar Manufacturers Association of
Hamburg reported that in the cholera epidemic of 1892 in that city, only 8
out of 5,000 employes in the cigar factories there were attacked by the
disease and that, there were only 4 deaths. Professor Wenck, of the
Imperial Institute of Berlin, has published an account of this cholera
epidemic (see _Laucett francaise_, Paris, 1912, p. 1425). His conclusions
favor the preservative action of tobacco. It was clearly shown that
slightly moist tobacco was a fatal germicide for the cholera bacillus; all
microbes die in it in 24 hours. The examination of cigars made in Hamburg
during the epidemic showed that they were absolutely free from bacilli.
Wenck asserts also that cholera microbes die in 1/2 hour, 1 hour, and 2
hours after having been placed in contact with the smoke of Brazilian,
Sumatran and Havana tobacco. The fumes of tobacco will besides kill in
five minutes the cholera microbes obtained from saliva. Fullerton already
quoted examined a small number of mouths (74) in the Johns Hopkins
Hospital at Baltimore. Of those who did not use tobacco in any form a
larger percentage showed signs of dental caries and decay of an advanced
stage than in the case of tobacco users. Similarly in the case of women
who never used tobacco; and, although there was a much greater care and
cleansing of the teeth, yet the percentage of decay and disease was higher
than in the case of men using tobacco. Fullerton says, "The smoking or
chewing of tobacco is decidedly germicidal. Chewing, by exercising the
teeth, helps nutrition and eliminates pathological agencies both by
destroying them _in situ_ and by removing them in the expectoration."
Rideal (already quoted) mentions that Dr. Burney, the senior medical
officer of Greenwich Hospital, London, asserts that the tobacco smoking
inmates of that institution enjoyed comparative immunity from epidemics.
From these opinions and examples it seems quite clear that whatever
portions of the decomposition products of tobacco reach the mouth and mix
with the saliva, or propagate themselves in the immediate surroundings of
the smoker, are likely to have extremely good effects. It would be easy to
multiply these opinions but there is no use laboring the argument. There
is a matter, however, it will do no harm to mention here. Today it is
being gradually recognized by the medical profession that the conditions
which lead ultimately to gastric and intestinal ulcer including
appendicitis are entirely due to infection. At the 1912 meeting of the
British Medical Association this was clearly manifested and some of the
leading authorities in England pointed out the importance of the mouth as
a focus of infection in such diseases. Now if this is so, it is at once
apparent how important tobacco as a mouth disinfectant and germicide
becomes; and it may incidentally throw some light (otherwise unexplained)
on the fact constantly observed that in persons under 30 years old these
diseases are far more common amongst women than in the case of men. The
use of tobacco is not asserted as a reason, but it may be.
With regard to other beneficial effects--Clouston, Fullerton and Marvin,
state that the moderate use of tobacco has a beneficial effect on the
digestive system as in general it causes an increased flow of saliva and
gastric juice which helps in the digestion of food; it also stimulates the
muscles and mucous membrane of the stomach and intestines. The sedative
effects of tobacco on the nerves is a preventative of nervous dyspepsia
and is valuable for the promotion of good digestion.
While much has been written on the effects of excessive smoking on the
nervous system little has been said of the good effects of moderate
smoking. Every smoker realizes that the soothing effects of tobacco on the
nerves is perhaps its most valuable property. Clouston's opinion, already
quoted (and none could be better), is that "tobacco exercises a soothing
influence when the nervous system is in anyway irritable; it tends to calm
and continuous thinking." Fullerton says, "It gives a composure and
feeling of well-being which are beneficial to mind and body." Of these
facts there can be no doubt because they are matters of common daily
observation and experience. Most smokers find a solace and quieting
influence from their evening smoke after the worries of a troublesome day
which no other agent can give them. The effect produced may be partly
psychological but that does not matter. Indeed the strenuousness of life
in the age in which we live seems to demand such a help and nothing
appears to supply the want so efficiently, so pleasantly, and with less
harm, than a quiet smoke. It puts the smoker at peace with himself and at
peace with others. Bush found in his investigations on the mental effects
of tobacco on college students that there was a temporary loss of ten per
cent in mental efficiency in certain faculties of the mind. This is
probably true enough though his results are not quite conclusive. On the
other hand many men find that they can think more clearly and more
consecutively when helped by a smoke. Indeed they smoke when they have a
knotty problem to solve. The point need not be argued; all smokers will
agree with it.
Judged from a psychological standpoint the effects of tobacco are entirely
favorable. To the sleepless, the worried, to him who is troubled in mind
or vexed in spirit, the pipe or cigar is a never-failing remedy to soothe
and cheer. It is the feeling of betterment which it engenders and the
spirit of good will which tobacco creates that are responsible for its
universal use by men differing widely in grade and condition of life as
well as in mental caliber; it reaches the common springs which move
humanity; its qualities are those which have made the pipe a symbol of
peace and a bond of fellowship and union between man and man from Pole to
Pole.
From a general summing up of the opinions which have been quoted the
question might finally be asked, "Is tobacco on the whole harmful or
beneficial to its users?" The answer seems to be this: "Tobacco to the
extent used on the average has some slight injurious effects and some
slight beneficial effects on the physical system. It is an excellent
preservative agent against contagious and infectious disease. Mentally its
effects are overwhelmingly beneficial." In every particular case a man
must judge for himself, taking account of his individual idiosyncrasies
and conditions whether the use of tobacco is beneficial to him or
otherwise.
REFERENCES
_Laucet._ London, 1906. Vol. I, p. 984. _The germ-destroying properties of
tobacco._
ARNOLD, M. B. _On the effects of the Exposure of Tobacco Smoke on the
growth of pathogenic micro-organisms._ _Laucet._ London, 1907. Vol. I, p.
1220.
MURRAY, J. C. _Smoking; when injurious, when innocuous, when beneficial._
London, 1871.
LEZARS, I. _The use and abuse of Tobacco._ Philadelphia, 1883.