1.  Excessive bulk is always dangerous, often disastrous, causing
 sudden death in a large number of cases.

 2.  Starchy foods are best strictly limited as we get along towards
 middle age and beyond.

 3.  A life which is largely mental or sedentary will be healthier and
 longer on a strictly moderate diet.

 4.  A life largely of physical labour must be dealt with on its own
 particular conditions.

 5.  At all times due regard, of course, must be paid to age, weight,
 etc.

 6.  On the whole, “eminent physiologists” have erred on the side of
 excess of proteid being advised.

 7.  Middle age is the critical time of life in respect to a man’s diet
 in other words, I would say in axiomatic form that as a man feeds at
 or about middle age, so will he be for the rest of his life.

 J. STENSON HOOKER, M.D.

 V

As a very interested reader of this discussion I should be very glad to know exactly what “M.D.” means by each pound of bone and muscle in the body weight?  What proportion (approximately) is it to total body weight?  I have been trying to keep up to Dr Haig’s 9 grains per lb. of “body weight” and find that it is too much for my digestive powers, which are very weak owing to chronic nervous dyspepsia.  If I take 15 per cent. or 20 per cent. less proteid my troubles are so greatly lessened that I feel that to continue to take the lower amount would mean perpetual relief.  But there have been so many warnings, including M.D.’s, of the dangers of under-nutrition, that I am in a quandary; and others of your readers too.

 If M.D. means grains per lb. of something less than total body
 weight, a lesser amount of proteid than I try to take may have his
 sanction, and be safe for me.

 JNO.  A. COOKSON.

* * * * *

There appears to be a sincere attempt in “M.D.’s” article to prove that a physiologist is the best guide in diet.  But, as one can get the degree of M.D. without any scientific knowledge of dietetics, the inference that one would be likely to make from such an alarming article is erroneous.  I say “alarming” because vague statements are made as to patients who were rescued just in time to be stimulated by over-feeding into a semblance of health, and we are treated to a list of very alarming symptoms in the last paragraph on p. 443.

“M.D.” says, “Suppose that the animal fed for years on unnatural food has become so pathological that it can no longer take or digest its natural food.”  How grateful to M.D. for this statement will be those who long for an excuse to cling to the spoiled, boiled and unnatural dishes of which the popular diet mainly consists!  And how they will continue to overeat themselves, content to avoid the truth regarding food quantities.