Page 64 - Spring2018

When the SIXTEENTH-CENTURY ROOTS OF mercury featured prominently in the treatment

syphilitics MODERN TOXICOLOGY of venereal diseases as well as other topical
As the ongoing controversy over the nuisances. For example, when modern scientists
1
exhibited mercury-containing vaccine preservative thi- carried out microscopic analysis of hair samples
classic signs merosal illustrates, modern toxicology hinges (head and pubic) from the preserved mummy of
of mercury on the notion that well-documented toxins the short-lived Ferdinand II of Aragon (1467-
such as mercury can be safe in small or “trace” 1496), eldest son of Alfonso II of Naples, they
poisoning, amounts. The origins of this perspective date found an extremely high mercury content as
16
this was back to the German-Swiss physician and alche- well as insect fragments that made it possible
“misinterpreted mist who chose to go by the name of Paracelsus to deduce that the king had received mercury
(1493-1541). Paracelsus pioneered the use of treatments for a dual infestation of lice.
23
as a positive chemicals in medicine and set the stage for the Syphilis appeared on the European stage at
therapeutic field of toxicology. 17,18 His influential idea that around the same time, and it rapidly attained ep-
sign of “lower doses—below a threshold—could cause idemic proportions (possibly arriving from the
otherwise poisonous substances to become New World with Columbus when he returned
response to harmless” went on to become encapsulated to Spain). Given mercury’s already accepted
24
treatment.” in the simplistic slogan “the dose makes the uses, it seemed “quite natural” to introduce
poison.” Thus, in Paracelsus’s view, inorganic mercury for syphilis treatment in the form of
18
mercury compounds could be therapeutic if “pills, suppositories, inhalations, fumigations,
administered in “proper” doses. According to ointments, sachets and injections.” In fact,
25
18
some medical historians, mercury also held a Paracelsus was one of the earliest proponents
special significance for Paracelsians as an ele- of mercury therapy for syphilis.
19
ment with “magical and astrological qualities.” 19 Dan Olmsted’s and Mark Blaxill’s eminent-
In the present day, toxicologists try to deter- ly readable book, The Age of Autism: Mercury,
mine, for a given substance, the highest tested Medicine, and a Man-Made Epidemic, traces
24
dose or concentration of a substance at which some of the fascinating history of what doctors
there is no observed adverse effect. This is at the time called the “French disease,” observ-
18
called the NOAEL (no-observed-adverse-effect ing that in its early years in Europe, syphilis was
level). However, it is not uncommon for studies particularly virulent. They also note that the
to document adverse effects at exposure levels mercury treatments put into use immediately
far beneath the NOAEL. Political and other began wreaking havoc. In some instances, when
20
factors also can bias the selection of a NOAEL. the syphilitics who were subjected to these in-
21
Back in the sixteenth century, Paracelsus terventions exhibited classic signs of mercury
recognized that factors such as the timing of poisoning (such as excessive salivation), this
exposure to a substance also “make the poi- was “misinterpreted as a positive therapeutic
son,” but he was unaware of many toxicological sign of response to treatment by the elimination
subtleties that have become more apparent in of harmful humours.” 19,25 In other situations,
modern times. These include the possibility of less credulous citizens noticed that “the cure
“pervasive adverse effects on [fetal] develop- frequently proved worse than the disease”; in
ment at dose levels that [spare] the mother” as fact, after administering mercury to hundreds
well as the phenomenon of hyper-susceptibility of patients in 1495, the Italian Giacomo Carpi
and the simple fact that, where toxins are con- “had to leave town in a hurry” because he was at
cerned, uncertainty is “ever-present.” Issues risk of being murdered by angry townspeople.
24
18
such as timing and age of exposure, individual “Antimercurialists” of the era also began pro-
susceptibility and nonlinear dose responses ducing written accounts of mercury poison-
are highly relevant to discussions of mercury ing, describing symptoms such as “stomatitis,
toxicity. 22 dental loss, gastroenteritis, salivation, ‘Hatters
Shakes,’ oliguria and pneumonitis.” 19
THE SCOURGE OF SYPHILIS The debate about mercury’s therapeutic val-
From the earliest days of its use in medicine, ue became even more pronounced in the eigh-

62 Wise Traditions SPRING 2018