Alchemy

[Michaelangelica]

Perhaps they were not describing the first act of making gun powder, but instead the first time that particular method was used to do so...

No, it was the same method both times. same three chemicals were mentioned in both sources. Is there another way of making it?.

 

I was reading one strange medical book last night and they laughingly talked about an old doctor/alchemist that used pig dung to stop nose bleed.

If it contains lots of saltpeter would it work?

 

I know modern doctors have found that "blood-letting" actually drops body temperature. So there was some logic in using it with fevers. The problem was it was over-used and used for everthing.

[ronthepon]

I know modern doctors have found that "blood-letting" actually drops body temperature. So there was some logic in using it with fevers. The problem was it was over-used and used for everthing.

 

Oooh! So that's a thought of some dangerous techniques: Lose heat from the body by throwing away some hot blood! Defenitely wicked!

[Mercedes Benzene]

Well although primitive, alchemy was very important to the development of modern-day chemistry. However, alchemy was most directly a philosophical practice connected to many of our modern-day sciences.

In essence, it was an all-encompasing research practice that influenced and was influenced by ancient and medevil culture and ideologies.

In regard to the previous posts, blood letting was practiced a lot in the past, and is still practiced some today by modern doctors. It has a fancy name (which I don't remember???) but it basically comes down to blood-transfusions in contemporary medicine...

The point is, alchemy was a very important precursor to today's sciences << especially chemistry.

:hihi:

[P-man]

Mercedes Benzene is right. Alchemy was one of the founding blocks of modern science, especially chemistry. However they used the four Greek elements: fire water air metal.

[jorge_jmt]

It depends on which alchemy do you talck about, the europena one had 4 elements, earth, fire, wind and water, and the asian alchemy had these 4 plus metal.

[IDMclean]

I would like to point out that Alchemy still exists today, it's just got a new image, new name and a new techinique.

 

Today the process of changing one fundemental substance into another is called Nuclear Physics. In the generation of Enriched nuclear fuels one basic substance will "miraculously" change into another.

 

Currently Alchemy has left it's infancy and started into it's toddlerhood. Given time we will eventually discover how to easily and cheaply change one substance into another.

 

Humans have this beautiful tendency to discover and codify things intuitively, and like so many first guess, alchemy is a truth. Even if we don't call it by the same name it still exists and will continue to exist most likely indefinitely.

 

Further i would speculate that with time we will develop new and different methods of generating substances, I personally look foward to Electrodynamic Alchemy.

[HydrogenBond]

The alchemists would be right at home, in modern pharmaceutical companies, extracting essenses from plants in search for new drugs. The technique is still based on the alchemy try and see what happens. If something interesting happens, try to explain it. The magical buzz word is now genetics. If that doesn't work use statistics (modern addendum) to overcome the deficiencies in understanding. If one takes out statistics and modern tools, it is similar to alchemy.

[Qfwfq]

I know modern doctors have found that "blood-letting" actually drops body temperature. So there was some logic in using it with fevers.

So does diving into a pool of icy water. Would you do that when you've caught a 'flu'? A fever is part of the body's way of fighting the disease, the best thing to do is to keep warm.

 

Blood letting was certainly considered a cure for most ailments, the idea was that they were beginning to realize that many thing were some kind of poisonong carried in the blood, so the thing to try was getting rid of as much blood as they dared to, so as to get rid of whatever bad stuff was in it. The argument had its apeal and came to be tried far too heavily and, obviously, is no use because it only weakens the body as well as its defences. Transfusion is quite the opposite thing, clearly not a "more modern version" of it, come now...

[IDMclean]

true keeping warm is good when the fever is reasonable, however as you begin to approach, what is it? 108* F? and your brain begins to boil it's not so good.

 

So there are times when it is also good to reduce your bodies temp lest it burn itself out. The body regulates itself rather well, except for when it is messed with by some outside agent (you, your friends, the germs, virai, dust, pollen, etc...) then it needs some other outside agent to help it regulate. (medicine, a doctor, another kind of germ, water, etc...)

 

There are Rules, then there are Exceptions.

[Michaelangelica]

true keeping warm is good when the fever is reasonable,

 

There are Rules, then there are Exceptions.

Especially with kids who don't seem to be able to regulate temp. as well as adults do.

High temp=kills bugs

Too high temp=kills people

[Mercedes Benzene]

Especially with kids who don't seem to be able to regulate temp. as well as adults do.

 

i've always thought that too... and then I was reading this article in the newspaper about a month ago, and it said that studies showed that young kids (7-13)-ish are better able to cope with fever-like conditions.

Weird eh?

[Michaelangelica]

i've always thought that too... and then I was reading this article in the newspaper about a month ago, and it said that studies showed that young kids (7-13)-ish are better able to cope with fever-like conditions.

Weird eh?

Perhaps it is only really young kids.

My child started to have a fit (what I later found out was a "febrile convulsion") when she was about 18mths old. I thought she was dying.

I called for help, ambulance, hospital "the full catastophe" as Zorba says.

I have never been so frightened in my life.

It turns out I could have put her in a tepid barth to bring down the temperature and the fitting would have stoped

 

For more info look here:-

 

What is a febrile convulsion?

 

http://www.netdoctor.co.uk/diseases/facts/febrileconvulsion.htm

© NetDoctor/Justesen

Rapid temperature increases can cause febrile convulsions.

Febrile convulsions occur in young children when there is a rapid increase in their body temperature. It affects up to 1 in 20 children between the ages of one and four but can affect children between six months and about five years old.

# The attack often begins with the child losing consciousness, and shortly afterwards the body, legs and arms go stiff.

 

# The head is thrown backwards and the legs and arms begins to jerk.

 

# The skin goes pale and may even turn blue briefly.

 

The first time a child suffers febrile convulsions they should be admitted to hospital. If the child has suffered attacks on earlier occasions, hospitalisation is not always necessary. However, it is always important, for example, to determine whether the convulsions are only due to a harmless viral infection. For this reason, a doctor should always be consulted following an attack.

[HydrogenBond]

I read somewhere where blood letting was a thing done in the spring, to promote a renewal of the body, similar to the rest of nature. In modern times, blood letting is still practiced, so we can give blood to others. The person who gives, often feels better after doing so.

[Qfwfq]

as you begin to approach, what is it? 108* F? and your brain begins to boil it's not so good.

 

So there are times when it is also good to reduce your bodies temp lest it burn itself out.

I'm aware of that, I have been told that, when I was a few years old, I kept getting acute bronchitis and the first thing they did at the hospital, each time, was throw me into a tub and dump iced water all over me! :D

 

However, I thought that remark was meant referred to more ordinary fevers.

 

The body regulates itself rather well, except for when it is messed with by some outside agent (you, your friends, the germs, virai, dust, pollen, etc...) then it needs some other outside agent to help it regulate. (medicine, a doctor, another kind of germ, water, etc...)

Uhm, in most cases, the fever is the body regulating itself albeit according to need. The higher temp is part of the defence, so I don't call it an exception to regulating ability. There are of course cases where something goes wrong with the system or where the temperature rise is excessive.

 

Anyway, it is well known that blood letting can be mildly beneficial in many cases and any good student of a good medicine faculty can tell you why, I said myself that the argument had its appeal, meaning there were reasons behind it. I don't see the point in saying things that may come across as justifying the excessive use of it in the past, or along the lines of "So, they were right after all." and "They were wiser, today's dumb doctors don't know their arms from their arses." and so on. Medicine is still very empirical but is based on ever increasing understanding of physiology. Apothecary is still practiced, with the boost of greater knowledge of the whys and wherefores, but also with the addition of pharmaceutical synthesis.

 

Alchemy is just the old name of chemistry and the term now used to distinguish the ancient practice from the more modern one, the empirical one from the one based on understanding of atoms and molecules etc.

[ughaibu]

Phlebotomy for iron accumulation in liver disease: http://www.liversociety.org/html/iron_overload_and_hemochromato.html

[IDMclean]

There are of course cases where something goes wrong with the system or where the temperature rise is excessive.

 

That was the situational modifier I was referring to.

 

I don't see the point in saying things that may come across as justifying the excessive use of it in the past, or along the lines of "So, they were right after all." and "They were wiser, today's dumb doctors don't know their arms from their arses." and so on. Medicine is still very empirical but is based on ever increasing understanding of physiology.

 

then it needs some other outside agent to help it regulate. (medicine, a doctor, another kind of germ, water, etc...)

 

I actually believe, for the most part, in modern medicine. I'm not saying alchemy is terribly good for treating illness, only that it yeilded some interesting insights into people and the nature of medicine.

 

I often play devil's advocate and enjoy spinning things into new perspectives. It helps open peoples eyes.

 

By definition, Alchemy would now be known better as Nuclear physics. The science of transforming one element into another.

 

It was a basis, it is a history, and it like it's interests has transformed from lead into gold.

 

*No hostility, sarcasism, or any kind of negative connotation is intended.*

[HydrogenBond]

What constitutes science, a logical understanding of nature or some black box empirical approach, where the black box stays shut. The alchemists were at least trying to open the black box and look inside. They had little precident to work from and had to create on the fly. What is interesting, if they kept the black box closed, didn't try to explain anything, but used statistics it would be called the beginning of science.