In the ordinary gastric fistula in dogs, when the operation has lasted a long time - over a year - folds of mucous membrane are often formed in the neighbourhood of its inner orifice which completely close the tube. In these cases a long, thick, perforated metal tube has to be passed in deeply, and yet the manipulation of itself never calls forth a secretion. Further, it is a daily occurrence to find in the stomach of the dog thick rolls of hair, and yet their presence in no way hinders the arrest of the secretion, which occurs when digestion has ceased. Such an occurrence would have been specially obvious in our dog with the isolated stomach, since it was bedded with sawdust in order to guard against maceration of the wound by juice trickling out. Very often we found enormous quantities of sawdust in the stomach, as much as half a pound weight; obviously the dog had licked the wound from adherent sawdust, which it then swallowed, together with that sticking to its nose. And yet these particles of sawdust of themselves, which certainly acted as mechanical stimuli, never caused a secretion.

It appears to me that this long series of facts ought to suffice to carry the supposition to its grave that by direct mechanical stimulation one is able to set the neuro-secretory apparatus of the stomach into activity.

And yet the feather and the glass tube continue the even tenor of their ways to this moment and function in some text-books, yea, even in articles which specially treat of gastric secretion as exciters of the gastric glands. There are, it is true, a few physiologists who hold mechanical stimulation, in relation to gastric secretion, not to be very effective, and give it a subordinate position in the series of exciting agencies, but as yet I know of no other physiologist who has wholly denied its influence, and who has not held it possible to obtain at least some juice by it.

To conclude this lecture, we will take into consideration a question connected with the matter we have just discussed. Since the contact of food with the gastric mucous membrane has no direct influence on the secretion, is its entry into the stomach devoid of all connection with the secretory process?

It can hardly be doubted that, under normal conditions, the stomach is the seat of certain definite sensations, that is to say, its surface has a certain degree of tactile sensibility. This sensation is, as a rule, very weak, and the majority of people become accustomed to pay no heed to it in the normal course of digestion. They obtain their sensations of general well-being, and especially of satisfaction from the enjoyment of food, without taking cognisance of the factors contributing to them. The feeling of general hunger, however, is referred solely to the stomach.

On the other hand, all of us have met with men who could describe exactly, and with gusto, how they were able to follow a special tit-bit, or a mouthful of a favourite wine, the whole way through the oesophagus down to the stomach, especially when the latter happened to be empty. Naturally the gourmand, who directs his attention continuously to the act of eating, can in the end distinctly perceive sensations, and even call them up to the consciousness, which in other people are normally masked by other sensations and impressions. We may therefore take it that the satisfaction derived from eating is caused not only by stimulation of the mouth and throat, but also by impulses awakened by the passage of the food along the deeper portions of the oesophagus and by its entry into the stomach. In other words, food which merely passes through the mouth and throat produces less enjoyment and excites, therefore, a less feeling of appetite than the food which passes the whole way into the stomach. The appetite, the eager craving after food, is, indeed, a very complex sensation, and often not merely the need of the organism for food material is necessary for its excitement, but also a condition of thorough well-being, together with a normal healthy feeling in all parts of the digestive tract.

For this reason it is easy to understand how patients who have diseased sensations in these organs, and who have no feeling of appetite, no desire for food, remember the sensations, whether consciously or unconsciously, even when they are no longer present. Cases are known to neuropathologists where people with gastric anaesthesia suffered from this loss of appetite. Such patients are no longer conscious of having stomachs, and dislike the idea of eating because the food, as they express it, appears to fall into a strange empty sack. In this way one can also conceive how the appetite becomes lost in cases of long-continued obstruction of the alimentary tube. The patients forget their stomachs, and in such instances direct introduction of food into the organ, after an operation, may suddenly bring back the appetite.

As a further illustration, I may be permitted to give an instance from my own personal experience. After an illness with which a transient but high fever was associated, although otherwise fully recovered, I had lost all desire for food. There was something curious in this complete indifference towards eating. Perfectly well, I only differed from others in that I could with ease abstain from all food. Fearing that I should collapse, I resolved on the second or third day to endeavour to create an appetite by swallowing a mouthful of wine. I felt it quite distinctly pass along the oesophagus into the stomach, and literally at that moment perceived the onset of a strong appetite. This observation teaches that the tactile sensation of the stomach at the moment of entry of food is capable of awakening or increasing the appetite. It is known that withholding food from the organism, or in other words the creation of a necessity for food, does not lead immediately, nor in all cases, to the production of an appetite, to a passionate craving for food.

How often does it happen that the ordinary hour for a meal has struck, and yet, owing to some keenly interesting occupation, not the least desire for food is felt? It is known to everybody, indeed it has become a proverb, that real appetite first sets in with eating. If this be true, the initial impulse towards awakening an appetite may originate in the stomach and not in the buccal cavity. When we spoke above of the desire for food being the excitant of the secretory nerves of the stomach, we naturally meant the passionate and conscious longing for food, that which is called "appetite," and not the latent need of the organism for nourishment, the lack of nutrition, which has not yet been transformed into a concrete passionate desire. A good example which enables us to differentiate between these two factors is furnished by our dogs with sham feeding. The necessity for food exists in such cases even before the experiment; the juice, however, only begins to flow as soon as this need has taken the form of a passionate longing.

It is therefore quite possible that in the case of some dogs, and at a certain stage of hunger, the touching of the gastric mucous membrane with any object at hand, its mechanical excitation, its distension by the food mass, may give the impulse which excites the appetite, and when the appetite is awakened the juice flows. This is possibly a third reason why, in the old experiment, the mechanical stimulus came to be considered effective. Viewed from this point it may, to a certain degree, lead to a reconciliation between my assertion concerning the inefficiency of the mechanical stimulus and the generally prevailing belief. I further also admit that mechanical excitation will at times call into play the work of the gastric glands, not however directly by means of a simple physiological reflex, but indirectly, after it has first awakened and enlivened the idea of food in the dog's consciousness, and thereby called forth the passionate desire. I hope that the foregoing will in no way lead to a confusion of ideas in your minds, but will assist you to an exact and concrete analysis of the previous simple explanation of the facts. This representation, which bears more or less of a hypothetical character, could, of course, be submitted to experimental proof.

For such it is only necessary to compare the influence which sham feeding exercises in an cesophagotomised dog with that in one having a simple gastric fistula.