Domestic medicine: or, a treatise on the prevention and cure of diseases by regimen and simple medicines. ... By William Buchan, ... The seventh ... To which is now added a complete index.

by William Buchan

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1812 edition. Excerpt: ... chap. lviii. of the venereal disease. tn a former edition of this book, the venereal disease was omitted. The reasons, however, which at that time induced me to leave it out, have upon more mature consideration vanished. Bad consequences, no doubt, may arise from ignorant persons tampering with medicine in this disorder j but the danger from that quarter seems to be more than balanced by the great and solid advantages, which must arise to the patient from an early knowledge of his cafe, and attention to a plan of regimen, which if it does not cure the disease, will be sure to render it more mild, and less hurtful to the constitution. It is peculiarly unfortunate for the unhappy persons who contract this disease, that it still lies under a fort of disgrace. This renders disguise necessary, and makes the patient either conceal his disorder altogether, or apply to those who promile a sudden and secret cure 5 but who in fact only remove the symptoms for a time, while they fix the dilease still deeper in the habit. By this means a flight infection, which might have been cured by regimen alone, is often converted into an obstinate, and sometimes incurable malady. Another unfavourable circumstance attending this disease is, that it assumes a variety of different shapes, and may with more propriety be called an assemblage of diseases, than a single one. No two diseases can require a more different method of treatment that the venereal disorder does in its different stages. Hence the folly and danger of trusting to any particular nostrum for the cure of this disease must be obvious to all.--Such nostrums, are, however, generally administered in the fame manner to all who apply for them, without the least regard to the state of the disease, the...

Genres: Research

598 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1769

About the author

1729-1805

Reviews

[Vibeke · Rating 5 out of 5]

There's very little of history that I don't find interesting, but since I've started studying medical history, I've found that this has become my favorite topic to research. The history of medicine is entertaining, horrifying, and endlessly fascinating. That being said, I put off reading Domestic Medicine for some time, because I didn't think it'd be very useful to me. I was expecting a text full of nonsensical medical advice, most of it rooted in superstition and folklore. To say I was surprised is a serious understatement.

It seems that most of the books I've read on the general history of medicine go on at length about how doctors in the past had no clue at all about the causes of illnesses as well as little knowledge or means to cure them. Domestic Medicine, a primary source, paints a slightly different picture--at the very least, a much more complex one.

This book was first published in 1769, almost 250 years ago, and well before the advances in microbiology taught us how crucial hygiene is to prevent illness. And still, throughout the book, Dr. Buchan repeatedly stresses the importance of cleanliness. Of course, without understanding sterilization of instruments and proper hand washing, it's questionable how useful his advice actually was. But at least he understood the principle of it, and when he goes on about the advantages of a good diet, plenty of exercise, and cleanliness, it sounds very much like advice you'd get from a doctor today.

Other points he makes that are equally (if not even more) pertinent today:

1. Babies should be breastfed if possible, preferably by their own mothers (okay, that last part is not usually an issue nowadays, but it was then). Infants should be allowed to move freely and exercise to build up strength. To prevent suffocation, they shouldn't be covered in a lot of blankets while sleeping. Very young children should be active and engaged in play rather than being stuck at a school desk all day.

2. Children should not be given sugary foods to entice them to eat. This one caught me off guard, because it's advice from TWO-HUNDRED FIFTY YEARS AGO that parents still don't pay enough attention to (yes, myself included). The full quote:

"Few things prove more hurtful to infants, than the common method of sweetening their food. It entices them to take more than they ought to do, which makes them grow fat and bloated. It is pretty certain, if the food of children were quite plain, that they would never take more than enough. Their excesses are entirely owing to nurses. If a child be gorged with food at all hours, and enticed to take it, by making it sweet and agreeable to the palate, is it any wonder that such a child should in time be induced to crave more food than it ought to have?"

3. For the cry-it-out/Ferber parents:

"Children are often hurt by nurses suffering them to cry long and vehemently. This strains their tender bodies, and frequently occasions ruptures, inflammations of the throat, lungs, &c. A child never continues to cry long without some cause, which might always be discovered by proper attention; and the nurse who can hear an infant cry till it has almost spent itself, without endeavoring to please it, must be cruel indeed, and is unworthy to be intrusted [sic] with the care of an human creature."

4. He advocated emphatically for smallpox inoculations, which is so very pertinent in this age of the growing anti-vaccination movement. He says,

"Surely such parents as wilfully neglect the means of saving their children's lives, are as guilty as those who put them to death. I wish this matter were duly weighed. No one is more ready to make allowance for human weakness and religious prejudices, yet I cannot help recommending it, in the warmest manner, to parents, to consider how great an injury they do their children, by neglecting to give them this disease in the early period of life."

5. Corsets are bad for you. Duh!

6. And finally,

"Keeping the teeth clean has no doubt a tendency to prevent the tooth-ach."

It does, indeed!

All right, so I've praised him for his good sense and sage advice. I suppose it's time to point out some examples of his observations and recommendations that we, with 250 years of medical advances, can with confidence say are far less laudable.

1. He claims rickets are caused by an indoor, sedentary lifestyle. We now know it's caused by malnutrition.

2. Fevers! He lists so many different types of fevers that I couldn't even recite half of them. He does, rightly, point out that fevers are a symptom of illness, not an illness in itself, but oh boy does he have a lot of theories on how these illnesses are contracted and how they should be treated. It would take too long to list them all, so suffice it to say that, of course, he believes that you can catch a cold by being outside in cold or wet weather. There are still people who believe this, so I suppose we shouldn't be too hard on the guy.

3. He has harsh words for people who live sedentary lifestyles (rightly so), but strangely, he also thinks that it's harmful to think too much. Quote:

"Intense thinking is so destructive to health, that few instances can be produced of studious persons who are strong and healthy. Hard study always implies a sedentary life; and when intense thinking is joined to the want of exercise, the consequences must be bad. We have frequently known even a few months of close application to study ruin an excellent constitution by inducing a train of nervous complaints which could never be removed. Man is evidently not formed for continual thought more than for perpetual action, and would be as soon worn out by one as by the other."

4. He is predictably misogynistic, which is certainly not surprising:

"Women, in all civilized nations, have the management of domestic affairs, and it is very proper they should, as Nature has made them less fit for the more active and laborious employments. [...] The confinement of females, besides hurting their figure and complexion, relaxes their solids, weakens their minds, and disorders all the functions of the body. Hence proceed obstructions, indigestion, flatulence, abortions, and the whole train of nervous disorders. These not only unfit women for being mothers and nurses, but often render them whimsical and ridiculous."

5. Perhaps the most awful was the description of what to do with teething infants. They actually thought back then that teething was such a dangerous thing it could actually kill a child. The following description certainly made me feel better about dosing my child with pain relievers when her teething was at its worst!

"Difficult teething requires nearly the same treatment as inflammatory disease. If the body be bound [constipated], it must be opened either by emollient clysters or gentle purgatives. [...] If the fever be high, bleeding will be necessary; but this in very young children ought always to be sparingly performed. It is an evacuation which they bear the worst of any. Purging, vomiting, or sweating agree much better with them, and are generally more beneficial. Harris, however, observers, that, when an inflammation appears, the physician will labour in vain, if the cure be not begun with applying a leech under each ear. If the child be seized with convulsion-fits, a blistering-plaster may be applied between the shoulders, or one behind each ear."

I could find a great many more examples to poke fun at, such as the importance he put on sweating and how many illnesses he attributed to "obstructed perspiration." Or how he thought consumption (tuberculosis) could be caused by trauma to the chest. And, of course, he thought that bloodletting ("bleeding") was, with a few exceptions, very proper and highly beneficial. These were the passages in the book where I wished I could travel back in time, smack him over the head, and give him access to WebMD.

And speaking of the Internet, he had the following to say to his critics who thought he shouldn't be writing a book on medicine for the common layperson to educate themselves. I found this an amusing passage that made me think of the modern Google-induced hypochondria (which I also plead guilty to).

"People are told, that if they dip the least into medical knowledge, it will render them fanciful, and make them believe they have got every disease of which they read. This I am satisfied will seldom be the case with sensible people; and, suppose it were, they must soon be undeceived. A short time will shew [sic] them their error, and a little more reading will infallibly correct it. A single instance will shew [sic] the absurdity of this notion."

My conclusion, then, about Dr. Buchan is this: He was, in general, a sensible man who gave a great deal of sound advice, but he also sprouted a lot of nonsense with somewhat puzzling confidence, considering I have no doubt that very much of what he presented as fact was actually just guesswork. But if he lived today and had the benefit of a modern medical education, I'm sure he'd be a very good doctor--maybe even an exceptional one.

Which brings me to my point. I really wish anyone who suffers from a chronic distrust of modern medicine would read this book (or any book describing disease, injuries, and treatments of the past, for that matter). There's really no better way to make you eternally grateful for the advances that have been made. Vaccines, anti-sepsis, antibiotics, and surgery with anesthesia. If time travel were possible, I think I'd stay right where I am, thank you very much.

[Laurel Fletcher · Rating 4 out of 5]

Already so good! Can’t fault him for medical things unknown at the time. He seemed to be wanting the common good for mankind and made his mark by giving the masses all he was able to, his knowledge of the times. Makes me think if Culpepper or even Martin Luther. Buchan made the current knowledge, that the scholarly (or religious, in ML case) communities of that day tried to keep vague for fashion or politics, plain and available to all.

[Katie Horan · Rating 5 out of 5]

buchan you’re a lil wacky but i still appreciate you i suppose