We have been told that the atom consists of positive and negative particles. Likewise, the body cell is built up of positive and negative portions. In both the neutral atom and the normal body cell, there is enough of positive and negative portions to hold the systems in a state of balance and equilibrium.
I have mentioned the fact that an atom, losing or gaining an electron, is altered so as to become a positive or negative ion. I have told you that a body cell, deprived of some of its electro-negative portions, becomes an electro-positive cell; in other words, a pathologic cell, with an altered “habit- chemistry”; and disturbed physico-chemical balance. This point will be made clear by na lantern slide.
Analysis of the rays and radiations from radioactive sources and the Roentgen tube, demonstrates the discharge of three forms of radiation; namely, alpha, beta, and gamma. The former two alone being electrically charged, whereas the last are energy waves, or electro-magnetic vibrations of the ether.
The alpha particles, or rays so-called, although of positive nature, may be disregarded as entering into the problem of therapy, due to their low penetrating power.
The beta particles are electrons, charged with negative electricity. They are the units of negative electricity. These are the units upon which our radium and Roentgen therapy is based. The gamma rays, although not electrically charged, are nevertheless of outstanding importance in the employment of ray therapy, not as previously believed but for their physical properties.
We know from the Theory of Relativity that Matter and Energy are interchangeable. This being the case it is necessary that we have a form of energy to give rise to electron formation when coping with deep-seated pathologies. For this reason the gamma rays from radiation bodies, or the X-ray from the Roentgen tube are of value. Scientific reason and research offer no other reason for their usefulness.
However, if this electron formation is desired at a point other than in the depths a means of ray disorganization had to be developed. This we have done for the treatment of superficial pathologies by interposing between the tube and the lesion a substance of sufficient density to cause the scattering of the primary X-ray beam, and still to be of such density as not to filter out the electrons so formed.
By such a procedure we hoped to supply to the electron deficient tissue sufficient electrons to compensate for those lost during pathologic cell change — a process of construction rather than destruction.
The stimulating effect of rays is readily explained by viewing the cell as a neutral atom, sensitive to the same physical alterations as are the atoms of any substance used in the study of atomic structure.
By this I mean, that atoms exposed to radiation are deprived of some orbital or planetary electrons by the action of the rays, and are thereby rendered positive ions, so with body cell.
The work of Butts has demonstrated that repeated and prolonged exposure to negative electrons is responsible for the gross tissue destruction and sloughing so undesirable in the treatment of malignancy, especially so when such damage is to the normal surrounding structures or when the area to be treated is in close proximity with large vessels, thereby adding the danger of death from haemorrhage.
He has also experimentally demonstrated that small fractional does of beta rays of radium, or corpuscular rays from the Roentgen tube bring about a marked biological cell change, atrophy of the tumor mass, and apparent readjustment to normality and normal “habit chemistry”, about which Dr. Butts has kindly agreed to speak in his discussion.
Analysis of One Hundred Cases Constantly Under Observation to Date.
PRIMARY CARCINOMA (36).
No. cases. Clinically well. Imp. Unimp. Worse. Dead. Unknown.
36 8 18 2 2 5 0.
RECURRENT CARCINOMA (43).
No. cases. Clinically well. Imp. Unimp. Worse. Dead. Unknown.
43 8 21 0 4 9 0.
SARCOMA (14).
No. cases. Clinically well. Imp. Unimp. Worse. Dead. Unknown.
14 3 3 1 1 5 0
Prophylaxis 7 (all clinically well).
Total number of cases treated, 183.
Number of cases verified malignant by pathologic section about 75 per cent.
The remaining 83 cases are not reported for the following reasons, either:.
(a) Case too new to report any definite data.
(b) Benign tumors are classified under separate heading, although the results have been extremely gratifying.
(c) All efforts to follow up cases have met with failure. Many of these are, without doubt, clinically free from their original condition as reports prior to their absence were very favorable.
