The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1883-02-07
DcCTOR AND DRUGGIST.

DOCTOR AND DHOGGloI.
1t occurs to us that it is always in order
for legislators Ito discuss questions relating
to public health. Wise sanitary regulations
will always be proper in communities where
intelligent people control public affairs,
and the more such matters :are discussed
tAe more popular they become, Hitherto
no very high estimate has been placed on
human life, Organizations for the Proven
ton of Cruelty to Animals, including cats,
dogs and turtles, are among the benevo-
lent enterprises of the age, and some
little Roadway has been made designed
to promote the well-b being Of human beings,
bat propositions which relate exclusively to
the preservation of the health and the lives
of the people generally have not hitherto
been regarded of sufficient importance to
command stringent legislation. But as
there are evidences cropping out on ell
sides that new departure is at hand, hope
revives. In this connection it is worthy OF
remark that there is bill now before the
Legislature of this State designed to i'm
prove the 'art or practice of preparing,
preserving and compromising substances
for the purpose of medicine" the science
or knowledge of drugs. II the bill becomes
a law it is safe to say that pharmacy IN In
diana will be greatly improved, and thereby
greater security will surround the health
and the lives OF our people. A "pharma-
copolist is one who sells medicine-an
apotkecary"-an it is just here thatanother
question arises worthy of special censidera-
ton. We quote from an Eastern paper:
A Western medical journal, in an editorial that
has caused a ripple of discussion on the usually
placid surface of professional journalism has just
raised question Of importance to the public as
well as to the practitioner and the druggist who
compounds his prescriptions The question may
be stated as follows: When druggist follows the
terms of the prescription, and an accident hap
pens from want of the necessary directions on the
Label of the bottle or box, who is responsible
therefore? In order to understand the issue
Alright it must be promised that many physicians
are In the habit of giving verbal directions to
the patient or his attendants as to the dose to be
taken and the manner in which the medicine
must be used, and that, in view of this
practice, druggists often put on the label
of the more explicit instructions as to DOSE etc,
which are necessary to prevent the possibility of
accident. When the compound is a potent one,
strong stimulant or narcotic poisons,
the questions that arise are whether the apothe-
cary is justified in assuming that explicit direc-
tons have been given by the medical attendant.
whether it is not his duty to refer the prescription
to the physician for information before putting it
up and who is responsible If a death occurs.
i. is the doctors duty to add to his
prescription express directions as to the manner
Of using the medicine, so that the druggist may
append them to the label But, suppose he neg
ects this obvious duty and relies upon verbal in
structions, must the .druegi take the precau-
ton to inquire into the matter, or may he put up
he prescr ption and leave the consequences to be
aYerted b. an overruling Providence?
1t will occur to good many people that
those who hang out the sign of physician"
should be able to furnish druggists with
exactly suited to the case, and
hat there should be no divided response
DiHty in the matter. The subject is sug-
yestive of the multiplied dangers to COM
which center in medical quackery
Il is said that ..some of the quantity signs
used in writing prescriptions are very
nearly alike. Suppose, in haste or careless
ness, the doctor writes the wrong sign and
hus Rrescribes a quantity Of morphia or
viride which tie apothecary knows
would be fatal if given in the doses IndI-
:ated, is the latter to accept the response
,ility of delivering the compound without
isking the doctor what he meantl Gases of
his kind sometimes occur, and il is the
custom of careful druggists, when in doubt,
% referthe matter to the medical attendant.
Lives have frequently been saved by this
but it may happen that the
prescription clerk is incompetent or careless
Ind puts up the compound, labels and de-
ivers 1t, without being aware of the danger
'r stopping to think of the consequences"
{ may be said if the druggist is as thor
'ughly informed as be ought TO be, the care
essness of the doctor will not be permitted
% result in the death OF his patient, but
uppose the druggist is as careless as the
loctor and an overdose of morphia, vera
rum or SEINE other deadly drug is admins
cred in consequence, who is responsible?
Possibly both doctor and druggist. But
loctors and druggists have no right to
,e ignorant nor careless, and legis-
ators of the various States should
nact laws which no longer leave the qles-
ion IF responsibility In doubt. Quack
loctors are a dangerous nuisance. They
re usually men who have the gift of CAB
developed, and are thereby
veil calculated to impose upon eommun
les. They look wise and talk learnedly,
'ut they are ignorant nevertheless. People
o whom they are known avoid them; those
My who are uneoqualnted with their in
spacity become the victims of their quack- |
ny. Legislation which will rid the State of
UGH pests will meet with unqualified ap-
rotation.
AND now comes another trouble with |
capacities for development in
bis country. We refer to the business of
IdnapiDg millionaires for the purpose of
Ensoms. The matter has been brought to |