An account of the efficacy of the aqua mephitica alkalina or, solution of fixed alkaline salt, saturated with fixible air, in calculous disorders, and other complaints of the urinary passages

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated.1789 Excerpt: ... CASE IX. Mr. Francis Loftus, of Market-Weighton, in Yorkshire, a person of sixty-seven years of age, and good constitution and general state of health, except with regard to this particular complaint, had been twice cut for the stone, the last of which operations was performed somewhat more than eight years previous to the writing of his first letter to Benjamin Colborne, Eiq. which bears date Jan. 27, 1786. He there mentions that he is satisfied that another is formed in his bladder, and though he does not there mention the symptoms that induced him to be of that opinion, it may reasonably be presumed that he must, from sad experience, be sufficiently qualified to decide upon such a question. Having seen in one of the monthly publications an account of the success of the Aqua Mephitica Alkalina, he made trial of it according to the receipt there put down, which by mistake directed two ounces of ialt of tartar instead of one, to be diflblved in two quarts of water. This he tried for near six weeks to 4 a pint and half daily, but without any abatement of his symptoms, save that his water, which was before turbid, and deposited a sediment that adhered to the vessel, became almost clear.. Mr. Colborne, however, having informed him of the mistake in the printing the receipt, and advised him to make trial of a, solution of half the strength only, he in his next letter, dated March 7, 1786, gives a more favourable account, His pain in passing his water was abated, and he was able to retain it longer. He adds in this letter, that the stone was an hereditary complaint in his family, that his father had it, but did not live to be cut. His next letter, dated June 7, 1786, contains little more than an account of his farther amendment in general terms, and a confirmati...