Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 83.djvu/257

Rh, however, to call attention to the fact, especially since a few physiologists still claim that under some circumstances it may act as a stimulant to certain bodily organs, that if alcohol were a stimulant, this would not, after all, afford any evidence that it plays a useful part in human economy. A stimulant as such adds nothing to human economy, whether such economy is considered from the standpoint of the race or of the individual. It offers no gain in the long run and could be of no real advantage in the struggle for existence. A stimulant can be serviceable only in emergency cases and under abnormal conditions and as such can not serve as an explanation for a desire extending to nearly all people in all periods of history.

4. The supposition may be made that alcohol increases muscular efficiency, at least temporarily, and that the desire for it may be explained in this way, but the experimental evidence forbids this view. Many series of experiments have been made by Warren, Frey, Schnyder, Destree, Tavernari, Kraepelin, Féré, Partridge, Elvers and others, using the ergograph and other forms of dynamometer, to determine the effect of small doses of alcohol upon muscular power and efficiency. These experiments have shown that, as the result of small, or so-called normal doses of alcohol, there is a slight initial increase of muscular power followed by a decrease, so that on the whole the results reveal a loss rather than a gain in efficiency. With an increase in the size of the doses, the decrease in efficiency is greater. Later experiments carried out by Elvers and Webber, using a control drink so that the subjects did not know when alcohol had been administered, showed no initial increase of power whatever. Elvers believing that the increase shown in other experiments was due to suggestion. There seems some ground for believing that alcohol, while it does not increase muscular efficiency, shortens reaction-time at first and facilitates the liberation of energy. This may account to some extent for the feeling of increased efficiency which follows the ingestion of alcohol. If it be true that it shortens reaction-time and facilitates the liberation of energy, it still does not appear that this would offer any explanation for the world-wide desire for it. It has not been shown that any decided advantage accrues from the shortening of reaction-time or the quicker liberation of energy. The normal reaction-time and the normal liberation of energy would seem in the long run to be more advantageous, Kraepelin's conclusion is that the laborer who gains his livelihood by the strength of his arm destroys by the use of alcohol the very foundation of his efficiency. The experiments of Hodge, with retrieving dogs showed that the dogs given alcohol did about half as much work as the normal animals. The experiments of Durig in mountain climbing, with and without alcohol, showed that moderate doses of alcohol resulted in a loss of about 20 per cent, in efficiency,

5. Alcohol, again, does not increase mental efficiency. The