Dec. 28, 1910.
DEAR MR. SINCLAIR,--I have your letter of the 14th inst. and its
enclosures.
To those who have carefully and scientifically undergone or advised the
fast, the cause of the symptoms that Dr. Kellogg and all of the rest of
us recognize as indicating self-poisoning, is readily discovered to
lie in the inability of the organs of elimination to promptly convey
from the body the products of food supplied in excess of digestion.
It is a conclusion that cannot be escaped that, when the refuse from
broken-down tissue and from food ingested beyond the needs of the
body is discharged into the intestines, and when means of removal
are not at hand, re-absorption at once begins and continues until
the canal is cleansed. Self-poisoning, autointoxication, ensues, and
all of its symptoms were emphatically shown in the fast of seventeen
days that Mr. Fletcher essayed. These results are also often observed
when feeding is in progress, and in this connection I refer to an
article written by Dr. Kellogg for _Good Health_ in the summer of
1908. In it he says, "The writer's observations, extending over a
considerable number of years, have brought him to the conclusion that
the cases which are benefited by fasting are practically without
exception cases of autointoxication, generally cases of intestinal
autointoxication, though perhaps also including some cases of metabolic
autointoxication." It seems to me that the Doctor has not made it quite
clear just why, if the fast is the certain producer of the condition,
he recommends it for the cure of the condition. Perhaps "similia
similibus" or "the hair of the dog theory" is implanted in the Doctor's
ego.
As we review the situation, covering in origin thousands and thousands
of years of wrong living, the facts are patent. The processes of
digestion and assimilation as functions have long since lost natural
expression. Drugs and heredity have created in them an inability to
cope with their work without assistance, and have in many instances
caused a positive cessation of normal action.
Dr. Kellogg would have us accept his dictum that the cause of loss of
weight during the fast is to be found in the impoverished state of
the blood, and in the fact that, food being denied, no up-building of
tissue can occur. Can he explain in this manner the wasting of tissue
in illness when food is regularly supplied? It should be readily
understood that, in either instance, the process of elimination of
decomposed excess food has at last become the predominant function of
the diseased system. Fasting is the voluntary act that permits rapid
accomplishment of the result; and disease itself is but Nature's
attempt to cleanse and purify by means of elimination. The longer
this thought is dwelt upon, and the more its details are verified by
experiment, the stronger becomes the conviction that we are facing the
truth of the matter.
When coated tongue, foul breath, and vertigo appear, whether feeding or
fasting, hunger is absent. It must have disappeared many days before
these signs became acute, although Nature's warnings did not fail of
display. The sensation of hunger, the desire for food for the purpose
of restoring cell life, is the human body's greatest natural safeguard.
A sentinel of lower rank is the sense of taste, which, however, like
other outposts, often becomes debauched and valueless. But hunger never
can be turned from its protecting task, and it cannot be stimulated
into action. Hunger is the one natural function that is incorruptible,
for once abused it withdraws. Its deceptive counterpart, appetite, is
the product of taste-stimulation, and, as Mr. Fletcher says, takes upon
itself the guise of habit. Or, as expressed in the text of my book,
"Appetite is craving; Hunger is desire. Craving is never satisfied;
but Desire is relieved when Want is supplied. Eating without Hunger
or pandering to Appetite at the expense of Digestion makes Disease
inevitable."
Had real normal hunger been present when Mr. Fletcher broke his fast,
the demand for food would have been so great and so insistent that no
denial would have been tolerated. Mr. Fletcher states that he did not
want food until he had tasted it,--a clear case of taste-stimulation
or appetite. Even this was momentary and was but the expiring flame
of taste relish left after seventeen days free from the progressive
accumulation of excess food. Despite his care in the selection and the
mastication of his food, Mr. Fletcher must still have continually eaten
without hunger, and must, as a result, have stored within his system an
unusual amount of material beyond the needs of his body. Had this not
been true, he would not have exhibited the coated tongue, foul breath,
and vertigo. Hunger would have been ever present, and it would have
been impossible for him to fast.
My only comment upon the neglect of the enema that seems to have
occurred in the conduct of Mr. Fletcher's fast is that it was a most
vital error. The enema is absolutely necessary. The question of diet
also need not be discussed, for experience shows that the feeding of
the body is a matter of individual requirement. If normal physical
balance be ever reached, fixed laws to govern the diet problem could be
formulated. In its present state, argument resolves itself into mere
utterances of individual opinion and prejudice.
Faithfully yours,
LINDA BURFIELD HAZZARD.
+-------------------------------------------------+
|Transcriber's note: |
| |
|Obvious typographic errors have been corrected. |
| |
+-------------------------------------------------+