Reprint from “The American Therapist,” 
February, 1895. 
THE PHILOSOPHY 
OF THE 
Physiological Action of Drugs. 
By J. Leffingwell Hatch, B. Sc., M.D., F.R.M. 
S. (tmwitfn). 
Visiting Physician to the Harlem Dispensary, Assistant 
Laryncologist to the New York Nose and Throat Hospital, 
formerly Lecturer on Bacteriology in the University of 
Pennsylvania, and late Sanitary Inspector of the Port of 
Antwerp, Belgium, in the U. S. Marine Hospital Service, 
etc., etc. 
Concerning the time when man first 
began to speculate as to how the functions 
are affected by medicaments, and what 
conclusions were drawn therefrom, his- 
tory is eloquently silent. Physiology, as 
we know it, was beyond the mental hori- 
zon of the ancients, and only a portion of 
what we know as physics being then 2 
termed physiology, from the two Greek 
words (pvffiS-nature and 
Literally a treatise on the laws of nature. 
Just when this word was appropriated 
for that science which has to do with the 
study of functions, we are also unable to 
say with certainty; but until the discovery 
of the circulation by Harvey, fifteen cen- 
turies after Galen had shown that the 
arteries contained a fluid instead of air,* 
physiology was as much a form of mysti- 
cism as the doctrines of the scholastics, 
and it seems equally as reasonable to 
argue as to how many angels can dance 
on the point of a needle, as to speculate 
on the oscillation of spirits through empty 
tubes in our bodies. 
It is only at the commencement of the 
present century that we begin to see the 
formation of a solid basis for the more in- 
tricate superstructure that is to occur, 
when Bichat elaborated his ingenious 
* Galeni Opera, Aer in Arteriis Natura Sanguis 
contineatur, Cap. VI. A. D. 150. 3 
principle of general anatomy, that he 
drew from his studies of the anatomy of 
Vesalius, fragments of truths intermingled 
with hypotheses like most things of the 
middle ages, the way to which had been 
paved by the system of Galen, who in 
turn drew largely from the Alexandrian 
school, the first to base its theories upon 
the anatomy of man, many of whose 
valuable records perished in that lament- 
able fire of the library at Alexandria. 
These gross studies led many minds to 
consider what the ultimate minute an- 
atomy might be that constitute these 
larger tissues. Bacteria had long been 
described and demonstrated by Leeuwen- 
hoeck, a naturalist of Holland, who work- 
ed with small bi-concave lenses, and pub- 
lished the results of his studies at Delphis 
Batavorum in 1680, ki a work entitled 
Arcana Naturae Detecta. But to Schleiden 
was reserved the honor of discovering the 
cell, in 1835, which is the basis of our 
modern histology. 4 
What Schleiden did for vegetable life, 
Schwann adapted to the animal; and 
Goodsir, in 1848 in England, and Vir- 
chow, in Berlin in 1858, so modified these 
observations that with a few alterations, 
such as to the theory of cell-division and 
origin, they remain practically the same. 
When science reached this point, when 
it recognized that “the cell is really the 
ultimate morphological element in which 
there is any manifestation of life,”* when 
it proved conclusively to itself that the 
highly deferentiated organism was but 
the union of mere amebae, and that the 
special functions of organs all reside in the 
primitive cell, drawn out solely by neces- 
sity, affected by environment, and adapted 
to the morphology thus produced, then, 
at this auspicous moment, was science 
moved with great* parturient throes, and 
Physiology was born. 
From this moment many men in 
* Virchow. 5 
many climes have been working steadily 
in the laboratory, and at the bedside, un- 
til we have our physiology of to-day. 
Coupled closely with this purely bio- 
logical science is that of the study of 
medicines as they affect these functions, 
and known to us under the title of physi- 
ological action. 
The physiological action of all drugs is 
traced to either the stimulation or par- 
alysis of some nerve-centre or nerve-end- 
ing. How this takes place no one has 
as yet satisfactorily explained, and the 
majority of observers are satisfied when 
they have traced the relation of a drug 
ingested to some physiological manifesta- 
tion, and draw at once a conclusion from 
cause and effect—“post hoc propter hoc." 
It is in the interest of philosophic medi- 
cine that I offer the following theory, that 
until it can be refuted or a better one sub- 
stituted answers the vexed question. 
Disease has been defined by many men 
in many words, but the tersest definition 6 
of all is, “imperfect organization in imper- 
fect action.” I like this definition on ac- 
count of the movement expressed by the 
word action; but the definition is lame in 
that we may have disease and not have an 
imperfect organization, just as we may 
have a perfect watch that refuses to run 
but needs only oiling or untangling of the 
hair-spring to set it going again; so I shall 
use here the definition of my old master 
and friend, Prof. Guiteras, who says, “By 
disea-e we mean all those modifications 
of the normal manifestations of life which 
impair more or less the adaptability of the 
individual to the surrounding media.” 
Now, these modifications of normal 
manifestations are known as impaired 
function, and are preceded by changes of 
structure, themselves being brought about 
by a primitive obscure alteration of func- 
tion. Function, of whatever nature, is 
controlled by the nervous system, so it is 
through this channel that relief must come 
when the function is altered. 7 
Medicines, however taken into the sys- 
tem, are absorbed by the circulation and 
carried to those parts on which they act, 
producing certain physiological results. 
All are not in the same state as when in- 
gested, for coming in contact with other 
elements and compounds, either bring 
about a direct action or a catalytic one. 
The blood itself must be affected in its 
electrical condition by the imbibition of 
the most benign substance, so that the 
normal polarity of elements composing 
the parts through which it flows must be 
also affected. These effects as they oc- 
cur from time to time give rise to those 
phenomena which are termed disposition 
or feeling. After a particular meal one is 
in a condition of “bien faisance,” because 
the reaction is a pleasant one, the changes 
in the blood have produced harmonious 
changes in polarity wherever they have 
gone and the organism is in a normal 
condition. 
After another meal there may be un- 8 
easiness or pain; this is due to the 
changes in the blood producing discordant 
changes of polarity where they have gone 
and the organism is in a pathological con- 
dition. 
Thus our normal functions, as well as 
our pathological, are due to a change in 
polarity of juxtaposed atoms. Now this 
change of polarity entails motion, and this 
oscilliation of plastidules in cells to sat- 
isfy polarity is of the kind we designate 
vibration. Thus we see that stimulation 
and. paralysis are phenomena produced by 
undulations. At first sight it may appear 
paradoxical that two such opposite results 
can be due to the same cause; but let us 
pause for a moment and look elsewhere 
in nature. Take for example the solar 
spectrum. Here we have a range of dif- 
ferent colors all the way from red to 
violet, and outside of these limits we have 
heat lines and others that are impercepti- 
ble to some of our senses but are capable 
of producing definite reactions. We may 9 
then, for the sake of comparison, put 
stimulation in the place of the heat rays, 
and paralysis beyond the violet in the 
place of the actinic rays, while between 
the two there is a large scale where one 
gradually merges into and blends with the 
other, stimulation being due to a lesser 
number of vibrations than paralysis. 
In both instances the atoms of the cells 
(the plastidules) move to and fro, but in 
the case of stimulation they move farther 
than in paralysis, and consequently are 
slower in the former than in the latter, so 
that in the case of light, when we get be- 
yond a certain number of vibrations we 
can no longer discern them; likewise 
when the vibrations that cause stimulation 
become too numerous we can no longer 
appreciate them, and paralysis results. 
The different cells of the body have a 
selective affinity, just as the elements else- 
where in nature, so that given a certain 
cell, a collection of similar cells, and they 
will be only affected by certain other ele- 10 
meats or combinations of these elements. 
So, also, certain of these elements and 
compounds will act more forcibly than 
others of the same group because the af- 
finity between them and the cells is 
greater. This affinity, like electrical at- 
traction elsewhere in nature, is due to op- 
posite polarity or a forced dissimilar po- 
larity by means of conduction. It is 
passed on from cell to cell of a like po- 
larity and causes naturally a vibratory 
movement, and it is the effect of this move- 
ment that we desigjiate physiological action, 
the intensity of which depends upon the 
amplitude of the vibrations engendered. 
Let us take as an illustration, the physi- 
ological action of opium upon the respira- 
tion. It has been found by experiment 
that death from opium, in the majority of 
cases, is by failure of the respiration. If 
the pneumogastrics are cut and the drug 
then administered, death from failure of 
respiration occurs and must be due to its 
action upon the respiratory centre in the 11 
medulla. Now, why does opium act upon 
this centre rather than upon the pneumo- 
gastrics; or, if it does act upon them at all, 
why is it not as intense in the one case as 
in the other? The answer lies in the 
proposition just laid down, that the selec- 
tive affinity between the cells forming the 
respiratory centre in the medulla and 
opium, or rather the changed electrical 
condition of the elements composing the 
blood after the ingestion of opium, is 
greater than the affinity between the cells 
of the pneumogastrics and the same. 
The attraction is so great and the wave 
caused by the resulting vibrations so in- 
tense and rapid that paralysis ensues with 
resulting suspension of respiration. 
The illustration of this single drug, I 
think, will be sufficient to make my theory 
clear. I could bring before you the entire 
pharmacopeia, but it would be to merely 
repeat the above example. The principle 
has to do alone with one of the primeor- 
dial factors of cell-life, namely the elec- 
trical condition. 12 
We are but yet on the threshold of the 
knowledge of the ways and means of 
electricity and its relation to life, and per- 
haps in the dim uncertain light of the pres- 
ent we are overlooking great factors, 
on account of their seeming simplicity, 
that to the clear sight of the future seers, 
will seem as plain as the principles of the 
telephone and phonograph to us, after 
an Edison shall have led them over the 
“pons asinorum.” 
2010 Fifth Ave., New York.