Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1906-08-05
Drug Frauds.
From the New York Tribune

tEoW tue new ork tribune.
With legal technicalities concerning the
drug trade and It's obligations and priv
ileges the public need not al this moment
De concerned Those matters are before the
courts. 1t Is to be assumed that the courts
VIII dispose or them In accordance with
the law. When that is finally done by the
court of last resort, 1t will be time to con-
slider whether its disposition is in accord
with the public welfare If it is, the mat
ter will be satisfactorily ended If 1t is not.
the fault will lie not In the courts but in
the law, and the remedy will lie In amend
ment of the law, which, If needed, will
doubtless be effected. Meantime, the pub
lie will not fail to reard the matter from
the point of view OF equity and morals su-
perfor to the technicalities of statute law
ana the uncertainties of judicial interpreta
ton; and thus regarding it. and acting ac-
cording to such view of it, the public will
1t certainly shouid-withhoId it's confidence
and its patronage from druggists who are
known to practice the substitution of other
drugs for those demanded by patrons or
prescribed in physicians formulas That
this practice has been widespread there is
only too much reason to believe Some
times 1t is because the druggist happens not
to have on hand any of the particular drug
called for, and In order to avoid bother or
delay, or having the patron go to another
shop he uses instead another drug Of
similar properties. Sometimes, prohahIv
more often. a cheap drug is substituted for
a costly one, in order to increase the drny
gist's profits.
In either case such substitution is dis
honest, unless, of course, the purchaser
is informed of 1t. 1t will not do to say the
substituted drug is Just as good" That is
not for the druggist to Judge, but for the
purchaser or the physician. In the vast
majority OF cases 1T is not true that one
drug is Just as good" as another, for the
reason that there are very few drugs which
are exactly the same in their action upon
all persons. The substituted drug might
be '.just as good for one person, and n
might be disastrous in Its effects upon an
other The physician who writes the IRE
scription knows which of two similar drugs
is the better for his patient. The druggist
does not know, and 1t is a gross imperti-
nence as well as n piece of dishonesty FOR
him TO arrogate to himself the discretion
and authority of the physician 1t is NOT
necessary, to incur this reproaeh, to 90
so far as the classic Pickwickian case az
substituting oxalic acid for epson salts.
Any substitution whatever Is to be con-
demned, unless, as we have said, the pur-
chaser Is frankly warned of it. SO that in
case of personal order he can exercise
his own discretion, or In case of pre-
scription he can consult his physician To
ing Is as truly fraud upon the purchaser
as 1t is to sell shoddy for all wool. or "a 81
iron for crucibie steel. If the law does NOT
forbid it. it ought to be made to forbid n
and until the law Is thus effectively amend
ed the public will conserve It's own wei
fare by applying the extrastatutory remedy
of its own discretion