the appendix, opening an abscess, withholding food till the acute
symptoms have passed; such treatment is not removing the cause.
Nothing short of changing the eating habits of the patient will
cure, so the surgeon who knows nothing about food and its
action--what part improper eating has to do with bringing on the
disease--will never be able to cure.

Operating for this disease will fall into disrepute in time, for
there are already cases recurring and the second and third operation
will be necessary among those who survived the first. There is not a
scintilla of logical reasoning in defense of the operation. Because
some get well after an operation is no proof that the operation was
necessary; fortunately for the operator there is no way to prove
that the case operated upon would have recovered without the
operation. If the case be not complicated by bungling treatment an
operation is uncalled for. If a case has been medicated and fed to
death--abused to the extent of causing a rupture into the peritoneal
cavity--surgery must be resorted to as the only hope.

If a case survive an operation the patient is no wiser than he was
before, and knows nothing about avoiding another attack, for let it
be said loud enough to be heard by all, and with no fear of
successful contradiction, that if every child at birth should have
the appendix removed there would not be one case less of
appendicitis than there is with the appendix intact. Of course,
technically there could be no appendicitis without an appendix, but
the cecum would become inflamed just as readily.

No amount of forcing drugs given by the mouth can induce a movement
from above the constriction, but a great amount of pain can be