Part 53

In the case of W. L. Anderson, captain of the Yale Gymnastic Association, there was a noticeable falling off in the strength tests in February and March, but I believe the worry incident to the intercollegiate contests, the steady training, and the business cares of the Association went far towards producing a fatigued state. W. L. Anderson is only a freshman in the Medical School; he did his studying at night, and this combined with his youth doubtless caused the loss of weight as much as any change in diet. He has shown the same symptoms before this year. At this writing he is in good physical condition. I speak with certainty in his case because I have had good opportunity to study him at home. _It was while under the restricted diet that he won both championships, these being the Collegiate and All-around Intercollegiate Championship of America._[44]

Schenker won points for the first time in the intercollegiate contests while on the diet; he showed no falling off, rather to the contrary, made a steady gain in ability.

Jacobus complained of a pain in his side but in spite of this he has entered a number of events, has kept up his training and is in good condition. Jacobus is a long-distance runner; great endurance is required for these events, and this endurance he has kept up. He tells me his stomach is in better condition than it has been during his three years of work at Yale.

Donahue has steadily improved in ability. He has kept his position on the Varsity Basket Ball Team, and has put up strong and aggressive games, and says he is as well as ever.

Stapleton shows no falling off at all. He keeps up wrestling, which is a drastic exercise; he works at heavy gymnastics and gains steadily.

One matter must be reported in reference to the strength tests. The first trial was made when all members of the squad were present. College men are very sensitive to competition, hence the great exertion put forth. The other trials were made when the men were by themselves. The “spur” was missing.

I have watched the efforts of these men with interest and care, especially as two of them live in my own family. I fail to see any falling off in strength, the case of W. L. Anderson excepted. The fellows report being in satisfactory shape and claim that the “ups and downs” are no more in evidence this year than in the past.

These picked men, representing several kinds of competitive sports, have gained in ability and skill on the more limited diet they are now using, and are not showing any signs of deterioration from the diminished intake of proteid food. I pronounce them, from a physical standpoint, in good shape.

Respectfully yours,

(Signed) WILLIAM G. ANDERSON.

It must be remembered that this letter from Dr. Anderson was written after the March strength test was taken, and prior to the test of April 20. Dr. Anderson was not in New Haven at the close of the experiment, consequently it was not possible to obtain his estimate of the men at that date, but there can be no question that there was a distinct improvement from the middle of April to the middle of June; certainly as marked as the improvement from the beginning of the experiment in January, to April 12, the date of Dr. Anderson’s letter.

Finally, attention may be called to the photographs of Messrs. Stapleton, Bellis, and W. L. Anderson, which are introduced primarily to show the physical makeup and muscular development of the men composing this student group. The photographs of Stapleton were taken in April, 1904, after he had been under experiment for three months. The photographs of Bellis and W. L. Anderson were taken prior to the experiment. They all afford a good illustration of the highly developed muscular mechanism of different types, with a corresponding adaptability for different lines of muscular effort.

REACTION TIME.

Through the courtesy and kind co-operation of Dr. Charles H. Judd, in charge of the Yale Psychological Laboratory, these students were subjected to the same careful tests during the five months of their experiment as were applied to the soldier detail. The results which are presented in the following report, kindly prepared by Dr. Judd, indicate quite clearly that there was no general nervous change in the reactors as a result of the low proteid diet. The data presented by Dr. Judd in this connection will be found in the accompanying tables, which, while indicating no noticeable improvement in the nervous condition of the men, make it quite plain that no deterioration whatever occurred as the result of the lowered proteid metabolism.

REPORT ON REACTION.

Reaction tests with the group of University students were conducted in essentially the same way as were the reaction tests with the soldiers. Details in regard to the method and apparatus employed need not be repeated. They can be found on pages 274 to 276.

Two new tests were added to the regular reaction determinations. One of these consisted in taking a record of the number of taps which could be executed in ten seconds. The reactor was seated before a table on which was fastened a telegraph key. He held the key between his thumb and first two fingers, and at a given signal began tapping as rapidly as possible until told to stop. Each time he tapped he closed an electric circuit. The current thus made was carried through a marker which indicated on a smoked paper each make and break at the key. A time line from a rod vibrating at the rate of once every twentieth of a second was traced on the smoked paper parallel with the marker record. By a comparison of the time line with the marker record, it was easy to determine the number of taps made in ten seconds. At first, the number of taps per second were counted, but the results showed such uniformity from second to second on a given day that only the net results for the whole ten seconds are given in the tables.

The second test added to the reaction tests was undertaken to determine the steadiness of the subjects. Two brass rods 40 cm. long were held in a vertical position at a distance of 7 mm. from each other. The subject took in his right hand a brass rod 40 cm. long and 5 mm. in diameter and tried to pass the end of this rod up and down between the vertical rods without touching them. The subject’s relation to the vertical rods may be further defined by saying that he stood directly in front of them and reached out nearly at arm’s length. The vertical rods were at about the height of his chest. In order to get a record of the accuracy with which the subject moved the hand-rod up and down without touching the vertical rods, the vertical rods and the hand-rod were connected with the two poles of an electric circuit. Whenever they touched they closed the circuit, and a marker placed in the same circuit recorded the fact on a smoked paper record. The time was recorded in parallel with this record, so that any long continued contact could be measured. For the most part, contacts were only of very brief duration. In reporting the results of this test, every contact made while passing the rod once downward and once upward is counted as at least one. Continued contacts are recorded as two, three or more, according to the period of duration. Where there are such added counts because of continued contacts, a second quantity is given in the tables after the first. This second quantity, which is enclosed in parenthesis, indicates merely the number of contacts without reference to whether they are long or short.

No special comments are necessary to explain the tables. Tables 1-5 report in sigmas, or thousandths of a second, the average time of ten reactions on the date, and for the subject, indicated. In the third column, is the mean variation for the series of ten reactions.

Table 6 shows the general averages by the month for a given individual, and in the sixth column the general average of all the determinations for each reactor. The fourth column in each of the earlier tables shows how much the results of a given day vary from the final general average. All the tables give, at the bottom, group averages whenever the full series is present.

Table 7 gives the number of taps executed in ten seconds at each successive test. The dates are not given in detail, but are the same as those of the reaction tests.

Table 8 gives the monthly averages of taps.

Table 9 presents the results of the steadiness tests.

The three sets of results, namely, those from reaction, tapping, and steadiness, differ from each other. On the whole, the reactions grow longer; the tapping varies, but shows neither decided improvement nor deterioration; while steadiness improves very decidedly.

The comment made on the results obtained with the soldiers applies here so far as the reaction tests are concerned. These tests were not repeated with sufficient frequency to reduce the reaction to automatic performance.

The tapping is such a simple performance that improvement is not to be expected. The absence of any general improvement or deterioration argues for an absence of any general nervous change in the reactors.

The improvement in steadiness is in part at least, probably in very large measure, due to the fact that the subjects became more familiar with the test and approached it with less of the embarrassment which attends a new and unfamiliar test.

The lengthening of the reaction times indicates a less intense concentration of the subject upon the work in hand. The slightest relaxation of attention puts the subject behind in responding to the signal. It was clear to superficial observation, especially in certain individual cases, that the subject was giving less attention in the later experiments. This lack of concentration is not obviously related to the changes in diet. Indeed, the fact that no corresponding falling off appears in the tapping would seem to argue that the lack of attention in the reaction tests was not due to deep-seated nervous conditions, so much as to growing impatience on the part of the reactors with the ordeal of being tested. The tapping experiment is less likely to be affected by lack of interest on the part of the subject, because here the subject is called upon to be constantly active, and there is no such opportunity for attention to lapse as is furnished by the intervals which intervene between successive reactions. The tapping is accordingly perhaps the best series on which to base final judgment as to the nervous condition of the men. Here, there appear the variations which show in any ordinary series, but there is no steady improvement through growing familiarity with the test, nor any laxness of attention to produce relatively unfavorable results.

Mr. Steele and Dr. McAllister are largely responsible for the actual collection of the data on which this report is based.

(Signed) C. H. JUDD.

TABLE 1.—FEBRUARY, 1904.

+-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+ | | | | | Var. || | | | Var. | | Name. |Date| Avg. |M.V.| from ||Date| Avg. |M.V.| from | | | | | | G.A. || | | | G.A. | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+ |I. Anderson, G. W. | 19| 153.5 |13.8| 31.4 || 26 | 192.2 |19.4| 7.3 | |II. Anderson, W. L.| 18| 261.0 |82.5| 32.5 || 27 | 293.6 |71.0| 65.1 | |III. Bellis | 16| 189.3 |40.0| 8.2 || 26 | 182.3 |18.5| 0.5 | |IV. Donahue | 17| 173.6 |43.0| 28.4 || 24 | 182.7 |14.5| 19.3 | |V. Jacobus | 17| 197.3 |14.7| 27.6 || 24 | 178.2 |18.3| 46.7 | |VI. Schenker | 17| 162.3 |29.7| 67.6 || 24 | 209.8 |46.6| 20.1 | |VII. Stapleton | 19| 185.1 |31.6| 23.9 || | | | | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+ |Group averages 188.8 | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+ |VIII. Callahan* | 18| 156.2 |10.4| 37.0 || 25 | 210.8 |27.2| 17.6 | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+

[*] Kept separate because series of tests is not complete.

TABLE 2.—MARCH, 1904.

+-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+ | | | | | Var. || | | | Var. | | Name. |Date| Avg. |M.V.| from ||Date| Avg. |M.V.| from | | | | | | G.A. || | | | G.A. | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+ |I. Anderson G. W. | | | | || 11 | 181.6 |38.3| 3.3 | |II. Anderson, W. L.| 8 | 235.4 | 50.4| 69.0|| 10 | 207.3 |32.2| 21.2 | |III. Bellis | 8 | 174.0 | 44.4| 7.8|| 15 | 180.8 |21.8| 1.0 | |IV. Donahue | 2 | 201.6 | 24.8| 0.4|| 9 | 214.7 |29.3| 12.7 | |V. Jacobus | 2 | 207.5 | 14.4| 17.4|| 9 | 189.9 |11.9| 35.0 | |VI. Schenker | 2 | 283.5 | 98.0| 53.6|| 9 | 296.9 |74.9| 67.0 | |VII. Stapleton | 4 | 211.1|41.7| 2.1 || 11 | 205.4 |14.6| 3.6 | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+ |Group averages | | 210.9 | | | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+ |VIII. Callahan | 3 | 202.0 |23.9| 8.8 || 10 | 197.0 |29.0| 3.8 | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+

+-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+ | | | | | Var. || | | | Var. | | Name. |Date| Avg. |M.V.| from ||Date| Avg. |M.V.| from | | | | | | G.A. || | | | G.A. | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+ |I. Anderson G. W. | 18 | 181.3 |25.1| 3.6 || 26 | 170.5 |26.1| 14.4 | |II. Anderson, W. L.| 17 | 189.3 |41.3| 39.2 || | | | | |III. Bellis | 22 | 193.5 |16.5| 11.7 || 29 | 181.0 | 8.5| 0.8 | |IV. Donahue | 23 | 224.9 |53.7| 22.9 || | | | | |V. Jacobus | 16 | 239.6 |41.0| 14.7 || 23 | 196.7 |27.2| 28.2 | |VI. Schenker | 16 | 281.9 |80.8| 52.9 || | | | | |VII. Stapleton | | | | || | | | | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+ |Group averages | | | | || | | | | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+ |VIII. Callahan | 17 | 200.9 |23.0| 7.7 || 24 | 179.9 |20.6| 13.3 | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+

TABLE 3.—APRIL, 1904.

+-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+ | | | | | Var. || | | | Var. | | Name. |Date| Avg. |M.V.| from ||Date| Avg. |M.V.| from | | | | | | G.A. || | | | G.A. | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+ |I. Anderson, G. W. | 22 | 202.8 |10.6| 17.9 || 29 | 182.9 | 6.7| 2.0 | |II. Anderson, W. L.| | | | || 29 | 195.0 |20.3| 33.5 | |III. Bellis | 19 | 193.0 |27.2| 11.2 || 26 | 182.5 |18.2| 0.7 | |IV. Donahue | 20 | 198.4 | 7.0| 3.6 || 27 | 191.6 |37.6| 10.4 | |V. Jacobus | 20 | 253.1 |70.7| 28.2 || 27 | 221.3 |14.7| 3.6 | |VI. Schenker | 21 | 229.4 |33.0| 0.5 || 28 | 250.1 |78.3| 20.2 | |VII. Stapleton | | | | || 29 | 217.1 |30.5| 8.1 | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+ |Group averages | 205.8 | | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+-----------+ |VIII. Callahan | 21| 205.5 |12.5| 12.3 || | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------++------------------------+

TABLE 4.—MAY, 1904.

+-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+ | | | | | Var. || | | | Var. | | Name. |Date| Avg. |M.V.| from ||Date| Avg. |M.V.| from | | | | | | G.A. || | | | G.A. | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+ |I. Anderson, G. W. | | | | || 13 | 181.2 |16.5| 3.7 | |II. Anderson, W. L.| | | | || 10 | 202.1 |12.1| 26.4 | |III. Bellis | | | | || 10 | 185.5 |19.4| 3.7 | |IV. Donahue | | | | || | | | | |V. Jacobus | 4 | 240.6 |42.4| 15.7 || 11 | 234.2 |40.0| 9.3 | |VI. Schenker | 5 | 214.3 |24.0| 15.6 || | | | | |VII. Stapleton | | | | || 11 | 224.4 |15.9| 15.4 | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+ |Group averages | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+

+-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+ | | | | | Var. || | | | Var. | | Name. |Date| Avg. |M.V.| from ||Date| Avg. |M.V.| from | | | | | | G.A. || | | | G.A. | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+ |I. Anderson, G. W. | 20 | 199.6 | 8.2| 14.7 || 27 | 190.7 |12.1| 5.8 | |II. Anderson, W. L.| | | | || 24 | 246.4 |34.9| 17.9 | |III. Bellis | 18 | 185.8 | 3.4| 4.0 || 24 | 171.3 |10.3| 10.5 | |IV. Donahue | 18 | 217.2 |18.0| 15.2 || 25 | 207.1 |19.5| 5.1 | |V. Jacobus | 18 | 235.5 |39.6| 10.6 || 25 | 245.4 |29.7| 20.5 | |VI. Schenker | 19 | 234.3 |40.5| 4.4 || 26 | 196.9 |16.9| 33.0 | |VII. Stapleton | 18 | 201.1 |11.7| 7.9 || 25 | 217.8 |16.5| 8.8 | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+ |Group averages | 210.8 | | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------++----+-------+----+------+

TABLE 5.—JUNE, 1904.

+-------------------+----+-------+----+------+ | | | | | Var. | | Name. |Date| Avg. |M.V.| from | | | | | | G.A. | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------+ |I. Anderson, G. W. | 3 | 197.4 |16.8| 12.5 | |II. Anderson, W. L.| 7 | 226.8 |20.3| 1.7 | |III. Bellis | 7 | 162.0 | 8.4| 19.8 | |IV. Donahue | 1 | 208.4 |31.7| 6.4 | |V. Jacobus | 1 | 284.6 |45.6| 59.7 | |VI. Schenker | 3 | 228.6 |43.3| 1.3 | |VII. Stapleton | 7 | 210.4 |34.2| 1.4 | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------+ |Group averages | | 216.9 | | | +-------------------+----+-------+----+------+

TABLE 6.

+-------------------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ | Name. | February. | March. | April. | | +-----------+-----------+-----------+ | | Avg. of all Tests for the Month. | +-------------------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ |I. Anderson, G. W. | 177.9 | 177.8 | 192.9 | |II. Anderson, W. L.| 277.3 | 210.7 | 195.0 | |III. Bellis | 185.8 | 182.3 | 187.8 | |IV. Donahue | 178.1 | 213.4 | 195.0 | |V. Jacobus | 187.8 | 208.4 | 237.2 | |VI. Schenker | 186.1 | 200.7 | 239.8 | |VII. Stapleton | 185.0 | 208.3 | 217.1 | +-------------------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ |Monthly averages | 196.8 | 200.2 | 209.3 | +-------------------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ |VIII. Callahan | 183.5 | 194.9 | 205.5 | +-------------------+-----------+-----------+-----------+

+-------------------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ | Name. | May. | June. | General | | +-----------+-----------+ Avg. of | | | Avg. of all Tests | all Tests.| | | for the Month. | | +-------------------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ |I. Anderson, G. W. | 190.5 | 197.4 | 184.9 | |II. Anderson, W. L.| 224.3 | 226.8 | 228.5 | |III. Bellis | 178.5 | 162.0 | 181.8 | |IV. Donahue | 212.2 | 208.4 | 202.0 | |V. Jacobus | 238.9 | 284.6 | 224.9 | |VI. Schenker | 215.2 | 228.6 | 229.9 | |VII. Stapleton | 214.4 | 210.4 | 209.0 | +-------------------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ |Monthly averages | 210.6 | 216.9 | | +-------------------+-----------+-----------+-----------+ |VIII. Callahan | | | 193.2 | +-------------------+-----------+-----------+-----------+

TABLE 7.

+-------------------+-------------++----------------------++-----------+ | Name. | February. || March. || April. | | +-------------++----------------------++-----------+ | | No. of taps in 10 sec. | +-------------------+------+------++-----+------+----+----++----+------+ |I. Anderson, G. W. | 88 | 78 || | 64 | 76 | 72 || 78 | 72 | |II. Anderson, W. L.| 81 | 86 || 76 | 84 | 77 | || | 83 | |III. Bellis | 84 | 90 || 78 | 78 | 80 | 76 || 78 | 69 | |IV. Donahue | 80 | 89 || 81 | 83 | 85 | || 86 | 85 | |V. Jacobus | 70 | 82 || 75 | 77 | 72 | 76 || 77 | 78 | |VI. Schenker | 62 | 65 || 70 | 64 | 64 | || 66 | 63 | |VII. Stapleton | 87 | || 68 | 71 | | || | 77 | +-------------------+------+------++-----+------+----+----++----+------+ |Group averages | 78.8 | || | 74.4 | | || | 75.3 | +-------------------+------+------++-----+------+----+----++----+------+ |VIII. Callahan | 82 | 75 || 89 | 83 | 78 | 88 || 86 | | +-------------------+------+------++-----+------+----+----++----+------+

+-------------------+---------------------++-------------++------+ | Name. | May. || June. || | | +---------------------++-------------++------+ | | No. of taps in 10 sec. | +-------------------+----+----+----+------++-------------++------+ |I. Anderson, G. W. | | 78 | 71 | 72 || 76 || 75.0 | |II. Anderson, W. L.| | 78 | | 85 || 78 || 80.9 | |III. Bellis | | 80 | 78 | 67 || 72 || 78.0 | |IV. Donahue | | | 90 | 86 || 88 || 85.3 | |V. Jacobus | 75 | 90 | 75 | 80 || 74 || 77.3 | |VI. Schenker | 67 | | 66 | 70 || 65 || 65.6 | |VII. Stapleton | | 81 | 79 | 77 || 74 || 77.1 | +-------------------+----+----+----+------++-------------++------+ |Group averages | | | | 76.7 || 75.4 || | +-------------------+----+----+----+------++-------------++------+ |VIII. Callahan | | | | || || 83 | +-------------------+----+----+----+------++-------------++------+

TABLE 8.