Читать книгу Treatise on Poisons - Robert Sir Christison - Страница 6

As to the nervous tissue, it is a fact worthy of mention, that the poisons which appear to act on the sentient extremities of the nerves, do not act at all on the cut surface of the brain and nerves, or upon any part of the course of the latter. This has been proved with respect to most active narcotics.

The power of the cellular tissue as a medium of absorption, has not been, and cannot easily be, ascertained. On the one hand it is difficult to apply poisons to it, without also applying them to the mouths of divided vessels; and, on the other hand, it is difficult to make a set of experiments for comparison with others on the stomach, pleura, or peritonæum, as the cellular tissue does not form an expanded cavity, and consequently, the extent of surface to which a poison is applied cannot be made the same in each experiment of a series. It is a ready medium, however, for admitting poisons into the blood, especially if an artificial cavity be made where the tissue is loose, as, for example, by separating the skin from the muscles of the back with the finger introduced through a small incision in the integuments.

The variations caused by difference of tissue in the activity of poisons have been viewed in the previous remarks as depending chiefly on the relative quickness with which absorption goes on. But in this way it is impossible to explain the whole amount of the differences sometimes observed. Some poisons cause death when applied to a wound in the minutest quantity, but are quite harmless when swallowed in large doses: Others are diminished a little in activity, but still remain powerful and fatal poisons. There is not much difference in the power of arsenic when it is applied to different textures, the skin excepted. But oxalic acid injected into the peritonæum will act eight or ten times more rapidly than when swallowed 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.^[58] 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.^[59]

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 other constitutions to be extremely inactive; for it has occasionally been found impossible to bring on the peculiar constitutional action of mercury by continuing the use of its preparations for months together. In general children are not easily affected by calomel as a sialagogue, but easily by its laxative action. As to alcohol, it is a familiar fact, that independently of the effects of habit, there are some constitutions which cannot be brought under the influence of intoxicating liquors without an extraordinary quantity of them and a long-continued debauch, while others are overpowered in a short space of time, and by very moderate excess; and there is no reason to doubt that very great constitutional differences also prevail in regard to the operation of a single large dose. A rarer idiosyncrasy is unusual insensibility to the action of opium. I am acquainted with a gentleman unaccustomed to the use of opium who has taken without injury nearly an ounce of good laudanum,—a dose which would certainly prove fatal to most people.

But not only does idiosyncrasy modify the action of poisons: Through its means, too, some substances are actually poisonous to certain individuals, which to mankind in general are unhurtful, nay, even nutritive.

With some people all kinds of red fish, trout, salmon, and even the richer white fish, herring, mackerel, turbot, or holibut, disagree as it is called—that is, act after the manner of poisons: They produce fainting, sickness, pain of the stomach; and if they were not speedily evacuated by vomiting, dangerous consequences might ensue. The same is often the case with mushrooms. The esculent mushrooms act on some people nearly in the same way as the poisonous varieties. Bitter almonds and other vegetable substances that contain hydrocyanic acid, sometimes produce stupor or nettle-rash in the small quantities used for seasoning food. In like manner many flowers, which to most persons are agreeable and not injurious, cannot be kept in the same room with some people on account of the severe nervous affections that are developed.

This idiosyncrasy may even be acquired. One of my relations, who was for many years violently affected by very small quantities of the richer kinds of fish, used at a previous period to eat them, and can now again do so, with impunity. Many people have acquired a similar idiosyncrasy with respect to eggs; instances of the same kind will be afterwards mentioned in respect to shell-fish, particularly muscles; indeed there are probably few articles of food in regard to which such idiosyncrasies may not in a few rare instances be met with, if we except the grains and common kinds of butcher-meat. I may add, that from facts which have come under my notice, I have sometimes suspected that a similar idiosyncrasy may be acquired in a slight degree, and for a short time only, in regard even to some kinds of butcher-meat, especially the flesh of young animals and pork. On this subject some illustrations will be found at the close of the chapter on diseased and decayed animal matter.

It does not appear well ascertained, that the effect of idiosyncrasy is ever to impair materially the energy of poisons, except in the instances of mercury, alcohol, and opium.

On the contrary, the tendency of habit when it does affect their energy, is, with a few exceptions, to lessen it. By the force of habit a person may take without immediate harm such enormous quantities of some poisons as would infallibly kill an unpractised person or himself when he began. There have been opium-eaters in this country who took for days together ten or even seventeen ounces of laudanum daily.

The influence of habit has been ascertained precisely in the case of a few common poisons only. On the whole, it would appear that more change is effected by habit in the action of the organic than in that of the inorganic poisons; and that of the former, those which act on the brain and nervous system, and produce narcotism, are altered in the most eminent degree. The best examples of the influence of habit are opium and vinous spirits. The action of such poisons is not always, however, entirely thrown away; they still produce some immediate effect; and farther, by being frequently taken, they may slowly bring on certain disease, or engender a predisposition to disease. A very singular exception to this rule prevails in the instance of tobacco; which, under the influence of habit, may be smoked daily to a considerable amount, and, so far as yet appears, without any cumulative effect on the constitution, like that of opium-eating or drinking spirits.

The inorganic poisons are most of them little impaired in activity by the force of habit. The pure irritants, indeed, do lose a little of their energy: for it seems that persons have acquired the power of swallowing with impunity considerable doses of the mineral acids. But as to inorganic poisons that enter the blood, habit certainly does not diminish, probably rather increases, their power. There is no satisfactory evidence, that a person by taking gradually-increasing doses of arsenic may acquire the power of enduring a considerably larger dose than when he began: On the contrary, the stomach rather becomes more tender to the subsequent dose by each repetition. I have little hesitation in avowing my disbelief of the alleged cases of arsenic-eaters and corrosive-sublimate-eaters, who could swallow whole drachms at once with impunity. Some have expressed surprise at this statement having been made in former editions of the present work, when there is such authority as Byron, Pouqueville, &c., for the hackneyed story of Soleyman, the sublimate-eater of Constantinople, who lived to the age of a hundred, eating a drachm of corrosive sublimate daily. I must avow, however, that such reporters of a feat so very extraordinary, and where deception was so highly probable, are to me no authority at all.

In the relative influence of habit on poisons of the three kingdoms of nature, a new argument will be discovered for the opinion given above respecting the partial decomposition of organic poisons in some of the tissues. In fact this partial decomposition accounts very well for the effect of habit: The effect of habit is probably nothing more than an increased power acquired by the stomach of decomposing the poison,—just as it gradually acquires an increased facility in digesting some alimentary substances which are at first very indigestible.

8. The last modifying cause to be mentioned comprehends certain diseased states of the body. The effect of disease, like that of habit, is in general to impair the activity of poisons. But it is only in the instance of a few diseases that this diminution is so strongly marked as to be important in relation to medical jurisprudence.—In the continued fever of this country there is a diminished susceptibility of the constitutional action of mercury; and this peculiarity is very strongly marked in the yellow fever, as well as in the bilious fevers generally of tropical climates. In some varieties of typhoid fever there is obviously a diminished sensibility to the action of wine and other spirituous liquors; but this diminution in a great majority of cases is much inferior to what some physicians have represented.—In severe dysentery the susceptibility of the narcotic action of opium is so much impaired, that a person unaccustomed to the use of that drug, may continue to take daily, for several days together, a quantity which might prove fatal to him in a state of health. In the severe form which dysentery occasionally puts on in this country I have known a patient take from twenty-four to thirty grains of opium daily, and retain it all, without experiencing more than a mild narcotic action.—In epidemic cholera the same insensibility has been remarked to the operation of opium.—It also occurs in the instance of excessive hemorrhagy.—According to the doctrines and practice of the present dominant school in Italy, there is an unusual insensibility during inflammatory dropsy to the irritant action of gamboge, so that sixty or eighty grains may be taken without harm.—There is no disease, however, in which the power of mitigating the action of poisons is more remarkably exhibited, than in tetanus: It is often scarcely possible to bring on the narcotic action of opium by any doses which can be administered; calomel, too, acts with much less energy than usual; and even common purgatives must be administered in doses considerably larger than those required in most other disorders.—Mania is similarly circumstanced: almost all remedies must be given in increased doses, narcotic remedies in particular. But there is good reason for believing that the impaired susceptibility of the action of poisons remarked in this disorder is far from being always so great as some have alleged.—Another disease allied to the last, where the diminution of susceptibility is often great, is delirium tremens. It has in particular been often found, that to produce sleep in this disease opium must be given in frequent large doses,—so large indeed, that they would undoubtedly prove fatal to a person in health. At the same time it is worthy of remark, that in some cases of delirium tremens, even violent in degree, the peculiarity now specified, as I have myself several times witnessed, is far from being strongly marked.—Hydrophobia always, and hysteria sometimes, impair the activity of poisons. I have seen cases of hysteria, more particularly those assuming the form of tetanus, where very large doses of opium were required to produce a calmative effect and sleep; and in hydrophobia it is well shown that the narcotic action of opium is not produced even by large doses often repeated.—The same state occurs in excessive hemorrhage.

In the operation of this class of modifying agents it is a general law, to which there are probably few exceptions, that they chiefly affect poisons of the organic kingdoms, and the narcotics above all. At least in the instance of most mineral poisons their influence is very inferior. Their operation may be accounted for in various ways. Sometimes, as in dysentery and cholera, the poison is carried with unusual rapidity through the alimentary canal. Sometimes again it remains comparatively inert, because on account of the impaired activity of absorption, it is not taken up with the usual quickness by the absorbent vessels. And sometimes, as in the instance of tetanus, mania, and rabies, the nervous system is in a state of peculiar excitement, by which the customary action of the poison is in a great measure, if not entirely, counteracted.

In a few diseased states of the system there is an increased susceptibility of the action of poisons: and it is important that the medical jurist should attend to this circumstance. When a poison has a tendency to bring on a peculiar pathological state of the system, or of a particular organ, which state is also produced by a disease existing at the time or impending, violent and even fatal consequences may ensue from doses of poisons which in ordinary circumstances are innocuous or beneficial. Thus in persons affected with apoplexy an ordinary dose of opium may accelerate death; and in people even with a mere tendency to apoplexy, if it is strongly marked, or appears from what are called warning symptoms to be on the point of developing itself, a common dose of such narcotics as occasion determination to the brain may excite the apoplectic attack. Thus, too, in cases of inflammatory disorders of the alimentary canal, irritating substances, in doses not otherwise injurious, may produce dangerous impressions on the tender membrane with which they come in contact. But in respect to this last example, it must be remarked, that the improvements or the caprice of medical practice have gone directly in face of the rule, by suggesting that some internal inflammations of the alimentary canal may be successfully treated with irritating remedies.

I might here perhaps have added among the causes which modify the action of poisons, sleep, and the administration of other poisons. The latter subject, however, will be better considered at the end of the Individual Poisons, under the title of Compound Poisoning. The former agent is of doubtful effect. Some observations on its influence will be found in the chapter on the Evidence of General Poisoning, p. 41.

Application of the preceding remarks to the Treatment of Poisoning. As an appendix to what has been said respecting the physiological action of poisons, and the causes by which it is liable to be modified, I shall here state shortly certain applications to the treatment of poisoning.

In the instance of internal poisoning, the great object of the physician is to administer an antidote or counter-poison. Antidotes are of two kinds. One kind takes away the deleterious qualities of the poison before it comes within its sphere of action, by altering its chemical nature. The other controls the poisonous action after it has begun, by exciting a contrary action in the system. In the early ages of medicine almost all antidotes were believed to be of the latter description, but in fact very few antidotes of the kind are known.

Chemical antidotes operate in several ways, according to the mode of action of the poison for which they are given. If the poison is a pure corrosive, such as a mineral acid, it will be sufficient that the antidote destroy its corrosive quality: Thus the addition of an alkali or earth will neutralize sulphuric acid, and destroy or at least prodigiously lessen its poisonous properties. In applying this rule care must be taken to choose an antidote which is either inert in itself, or, if poisonous, is, like the poison for which it is given, a pure corrosive or local irritant, and one whose properties are reciprocally neutralized.

If the poison, on the other hand, besides possessing a local action, likewise acts remotely through absorption, or by an impression on the inner coat of the vessels, mere neutralization of its chemical properties is not sufficient; for we have seen above that such poisons act throughout all their chemical combinations which are soluble. Here, therefore, it is necessary that the chemical antidote render the poison insoluble or nearly so; and insoluble not only in water, but likewise in the animal fluids, more particularly the juices of the stomach. The same quality is desirable even in the antidotes for the pure corrosives; for it often happens that in their soluble combinations these substances retain some irritating, though not any corrosive power. When we try by the foregoing criterions many of the antidotes which have been proposed for various poisons, they will be found defective; and precise experiments have in recent times actually proved them to be so.

The other kind of antidote operates not by altering the form of the poison, but by exciting in the system an action contrary to that established by the poison. On considering attentively, however, the phenomena of the action of individual poisons, it will be found exceedingly difficult to say what is the essence of a contrary action, and still more how that counter-action is to be brought about. Accordingly, few antidotes of the kind are known. Physiology or experience has not yet brought to light any mode of inducing an action counter to that caused by arsenic and most of the irritant class of poisons. It appears probable that the remote operation of lead may be sometimes corrected by mercury given to salivation, and that the violent salivation caused by mercury may be occasionally corrected by nauseating doses of antimony. But these are the only instances which occur to me at present of antidotes for irritant poisoning which operate by counter-action, unless we choose to designate by the name of antidote the conjunction of remedial means which constitute the antiphlogistic method of cure. In the class of narcotics we are acquainted with equally few constitutional antidotes, although the nature of the action of these poisons seems better to admit of them. Ammonia is to a certain extent an antidote for hydrocyanic acid, but by no means so powerful as some persons believe; and I am not sure that in this class of poisons we can with any propriety mention another antidote of the constitutional kind.

On the whole, then, it is chiefly among the changes induced by chemical affinities that the practitioner must look for counter-poisons; and the ingenuity of the toxicologists has thence supplied the materia medica with many of singular efficacy. When given in time, magnesia or chalk is an antidote for the mineral acids and oxalic acid, albumen for corrosive sublimate and verdigris, bark for tartar-emetic, common salt for lunar caustic, sulphate of soda or magnesia for sugar of lead and muriate of baryta, chloride of lime or soda for liver of sulphur, vinegar or oil for the fixed alkalis; and these substances act either by neutralizing the corrosive power of the poison, or by forming with it an insoluble compound.

In recent times a new object in the treatment of poisoning has been pointed out by the discoveries made in its physiology. As it has been proved that many of the most deadly poisons enter the blood, and in all probability act by circulating with that fluid, so it has been inferred that an important object in the treatment is to promote their discharge by the natural secretions. In support of this reasonable inference it has been lately rendered probable by Orfila, as will be seen under the head of the treatment of the effects of arsenic, that it is of great advantage in some forms of poisoning to increase the discharge of urine.

In the instance of external poisoning the main object of the treatment is to prevent the poison from entering the blood, or to remove it from the local vessels which it has entered.

One mode, which has been known to the profession from early times, and after being long in disuse was lately revived by Sir D. Barry, and applied with success to man, is the application of cupping-glasses to the part where the poison has been introduced.^[60] This method may act in various ways. It certainly prevents the farther absorption of the poison by suspending for a time the absorbing power of the vessels of the part covered by the cup. It also sucks the blood out of the wound, and may consequently wash the poison away with it. Possibly it likewise compresses the nerves around, and prevents the impression made by the poison on their sentient extremities from being transmitted along their filaments.

Another mode is by the application of a ligature between the injured part and the trunk, so as to check the circulation. This is a very ancient practice in the case of poisoned wounds, and is known even to savages. But as usually practised it is only a temporary cure: As soon as the ligature is removed the effects of the poison begin. It may be employed, however, for many kinds of poisoning through wounds, so as to effect a radical cure. We have seen that most poisons of the organic kingdom are in no long time either thrown off by the system or decomposed in the blood. Hence if the quantity given has not been too large, recovery will take place. Now, by means of a ligature, which is removed for a short time at moderately distant intervals, a poison, which has been introduced into a wound beyond the reach of extraction, may be gradually admitted into the system in successive quantities, each too small to cause death or serious mischief, and be thus in the end entirely removed and destroyed. Such is a practical application which may be made of some ingenious experiments performed not long ago by M. Bouillaud with strychnia, the poisonous principle of nux-vomica.^[61]

The last mode to be mentioned is by a combination of the ligature with venesection, deduced by M. Vernière from his experimental researches formerly noticed (p. 19). Suppose a fatal dose of extract of nux-vomica has been thrust into the paw of a dog; M. Vernière applies a tight ligature round the limb, next injects slowly as much warm water into the jugular vein as the animal can safely bear, and then slackens the ligature. The state of venous plethora thus induced completely suspends absorption. The ligature is next tied so as to compress the veins without compressing the arteries of the limb, and a vein is opened between the wound and the ligature in such a situation, that the blood which flows out must previously pass through, or at least near the poisoned wound. When a moderate quantity has been withdrawn, the ligature may be removed with safety; and the extraction of the poison may be farther proved by the blood that has been drawn being injected into the veins of another animal; for rapid death by tetanus will be the result.^[62] It is not improbable that in this plan the preliminary production of venous plethora may be dispensed with; and then the treatment may be easily and safely applied to the human subject.