Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1907-07-01
WHEN HAMLET EXCLAIMED AYE
THERE'S THE RUB" COULD HE
HAVE REFERRED TO VI
SAPOL 10

try. This will create state of affairs
i'll which arrogance and i.lziness on Tho
part of the physician will u" encouraged
and all Spont.tneitY and i5"oN,h ot the
h"alin" arts discouraged
| would conilnc all medical LEGISLATION
to the regulation of fraud. If amy nor,
laws are needed to punish frand they
should be passed. But | 10 not thin,
that any more laws are needed. All that
We need is the thorough execution Of such
laws rs We have. Every doctor should II
held responsible Tor his mistakes. regard
loss OF diplomas. regardless Of schools OF
practice. 1t should be made easy for thu
pr"pl" To protect themselves against care
ltSSncss and ignorance. But, while this
Is h''in" lone. the people should be left
absolutely frC" to choose their own med
icin". to select their own doctors.
When I ply sicIan decides to change the
treatment OF 4 patient. as is often done
1T is heca':Se his first experiment did not
prove "itcctual, and he has decided to
make another experiment. 1t is not posi-
hl" for him to ascertain this fact in an
Other way except by experiment.
If IT." patient is ignorant Of the mcdi-
cine H." is taking. but the medicine ms kos
him worse instead of hetter and he final
~ concludes to change doctors. the second
doctor is liable II give him the same med
icinc tie first doctor gave him. OF course
the mcdicine may he slightly different in
taSt" ANA color. and somewhat different
in its effect. but he is very liable to get
practically the same medicine that The
other doctor gave him. II the first doctor
had tnid his patient what he was taking
or ii The patient had in any way learned
the name of the mixture. it would he bet
ter for him. because then he could re-
frs" :" take the same medicine after he
had once given it a thorough trial
1t is Il p';ifui Sl>;ht to see Patients going
from: doctor to doctor for some chronic,
ailments. Changire doctors every now aud
then. hut receiving from each doctor
practically the same treatment. The pa
ticnt is in tie dark nj! the time. He did
not know What tie filSt doctor gave him.
He did not know what the second doctor
gave Rim. and 50 he may go on until
doo,nsday changing doctors without, in
rcplitv. changing his treatment.
THIS would not be so if tn" patient
We're allowed to so To the drug store AMI
buy the proprietary medicine, Ihc name
of which he knows. For. havin" bought
him. I've Can forever afterwards refuse 10
take the same medicine again. for eX-
perience has taught him that it does not
help him. Tie next times he buys n pro-
prietlry medicine for his ailTent he will
naturally buy different one. ami in all
probability would get different mixture.
their use Of proprietary medicines. They
try one remedy for rheumatism. III 1t
does not help them they need never pur-
chase that remedy again. They then Sc
lcct some other remedy that has n repu-
tation for curing rheumatism. If that
remedy also fails to help them. they can
select = third. Each experience makes
them n little wiser as to what remedies
will not help them.
The so-callei ethical doctors are prac-
ticaIIy agreed in their opposition to le:-
ring the PATIENTS know ANYTHING apcut
their treatment. To keen the people in
the dark as to remedies is considered TO
be medical ethics.
The doctors who put up proprietary
medicines try to instruct the people. At
least they intend to- Many Of them may
he unfit to give such instruction and 1t
is barely possible that some of them in
tentionally nislead tho people. but in the
main. the doctors who manufacture or
prescribe a proprietary medicine try Ia
make their patients more intelligent as t.
the Hse of medicines C s Carr VI D,
Columbus, Ohio, in the Medical Brief.