This claim is anchored to the one pamphlet edition whose text this bundle can read: the 62-page 1750 printing catalogued on the Internet Archive, whose OCR full text was fetched directly on 2026-08-02. That edition reprints the patent abstract, with its four named conditions, and then goes well past it — opening on the premise that nature provides a remedy for every malady, describing the balsam as re-establishing a decayed constitution and restoring health after years of pain, and filling the rest of the pamphlet with signed testimonial letters, one of which credits a single bottle with curing an apprehended consumption. The claim rests on testimonial assertion, not measured outcomes, which is why it is typed testimonial and left unreplicated.

A fuller and more sweeping version of the promise survives in a different printing. The 2025 Australian Pharmacist account quotes an undated 46-page pamphlet in which the balsam is “a certain relief” for a long list running from gravel and gout to consumptive, asthmatical, and nervous disorders; that passage is reproduced and attributed in the Case. It is deliberately NOT dated here: the 1750 text contains neither that wording nor the words “asthmatical” or “nervous” anywhere, and 62 pages against 46 makes them different printings, so no source in this bundle establishes when the fuller wording was first printed.