s up the
eternal energy which is one. They are all species of the one, but it
is convenient and even necessary for our limited intellects to
consider them separately, for the indefinite number of the facts and
also their intricacy and complexity stagger and overwhelm us unless we
do; and indeed they stagger us even when we try to treat them and take
them up separately for consideration and examination. But now for the
proof of A.A. Voysey's statement.

Ranke found he required 100 grammes proteid; fat 100 grammes;
carbo-hydrate 240 grammes to keep him going. These he could have got
from 9 oz. of lean meat or 250 grammes, 18 oz. of bread or 500
grammes, 12 oz. or 55 grammes of butter and 1 oz of fat (I do not, of
course, suggest that it would have been wise for him to get them so).
Moleschott's demands are: proteid 120 grammes, fat 90 grammes,
carbo-hydrate 333 grammes. Voit demands for hard work: proteid 145
grammes, fat 100 grammes, carbo-hydrate 450 grammes. Atwater demands
for hard work the following:--proteid 177 grammes, fat 250 grammes,
carbo-hydrate 650 grammes. Horace Fletcher, we are told by Professor
Chittenden, took for a time, when everything was accurately measured
and weighed: proteid 44.9 grammes, fat 38 grammes, carbo-hydrate 253
grammes. Cornaro lived on 12 oz. of solid food and 14 oz. of red wine
a day for a period of something like 60 years, from 38 years of age to
about 97, and had vigorous health during the time except when he
transgressed his rule. Of course, he was not a hard physical
worker--_i.e._ he did not do the work of a navvy. But how, in view of
these differences, can M.D. say: "These quantities were settled by
physiologists many years ago, and no good reasons have since been
adduced for altering them"? It is amazing to me to read such a
statement. It reminds me of a statement by a distinguished physician
in London during last year to the effect that we could not give a
growing schoolboy too much food--we could not over-feed him. My
opinion, on the other hand, after a long experience, during which time
my eyes have not been shut, is that the large majority of the diseases
of humanity are due to mal-nutrition and that the form of that
mal-nutrition is over-feeding--not under-feeding. This opinion should
be taken for what it is worth. But to test it we should ask ourselves:
What is the reason for the necessity to take food into the body? Is it
to give strength and heat to the body? Or is it