I don't think Latin was a language of instruction in modern times -- and yes, the 19th century counts as modern, as does the 18th. Samuel Johnson, I believe, communicated with a Frenchman in Latin, and this was noted as being rather exceptional.
I heard that it was used in medicine in the 19th century, but it was hearsay so it could be wrong.
When he was a teenager, Enrico Fermi studied physics using this book, which was written in Latin in the mid-19th century (see here, in Italian). He had bought a copy from a bookstand in Campo de' Fiori, and apparently told his parents that he only realised it was written in Latin after he'd finished it.
Liber adhuc exstat, multis cum notis exaratus ("lo studia a fondo come risulta dalle numerose annotazioni in margine al testo e da foglietti pieni di calcoli ritrovati all'interno.").
Sounds like bloodshed...
It does, but not more than cannula arteriosa looks like "artery-ful cannula".
What is your rationale for using hora here?
It is used to say things like Blood Loss 300mls. Would that work?
It is short for time of fasting from solids. Would cibo abstinendi be enough by itself?
I guess so.
It seems weird by itself. What about spatium?
Probably.
Seems good to me.
There are anatomical structures such as the ductus venosus and the ductus arteriosus, so I am thinking it is probably OK in medical Latin.
We normally write the time at which they they commenced fasting. eg Fasting 0700. Would that work with spatium?
Ah, no. When you said "time of fasting from solids" I thought you meant the whole time that the patient had been fasting. If it's only the start, then hora makes more sense indeed, though I guess you could also say initium or so.
The Spanish looks like the Latin sanguis perditus. Do you think that would work?
Yes, but in classical Latin perdo more often refers to losing through one's own fault whereas amitto refers to losing by accident, that's why I chose the latter. The distinction isn't always observed strictly, though, so perditus should be acceptable as well.
