Ashland tidings. [volume] (Ashland, Or.) 1876-1919, 1914-11-02
Painless Parker and the Dental
TImSf

Qu0SIlOH 10 COnSluef III LHlS ueHIdl
bill is, Shall Oregon remove that
stubborn, legal, ethical dental mo-
wall against true scientific dentistry
and give us efficient sanitary, PAIN
LESS instead of PAINFUL dentistry?
The political trickery, unjust meth
DDS, false impressions and childish
imaginations, of all the evils that
would result to our Oregon girls,
womanhood, and health of our people
reminds me of little five-year-old
girl who was crying Historically and
who, after prolonged entreaties by
her mother to stop crying and tell
what was the matter, finally, in the
midst of sobs, said "Oh mamma, if
If should grow up to be wom-
an and get married and have little
baby and get busy about my house
work and that little darling should
crawl in the oven and burn to death,
oh, amma!-boo-h o-boo-hoo-
boo-hoo-it would just break my
| heart! Boo-hoo!" And the position
taken by the ethical dentists is Who'll
ly imaginary and a strike directly
against DR.. Parker and his improved
methods of dentistry, which all who
investigate will find to be one hun
dred years in advance of our present
methods
But DR.. Parker is not ethical in
the parlance of orthodox or ethical
dentistry. And in evidence of the
fact that it is not high moral WORTH
ness or dental preparedness which
they claim, will cite two facts:
First-One of the men on the state
examination board has no diploma
from any college, and yet his ignor-
ance through the trust is permitted to
bar out DR.. Parker, who is a gradu-
ate of the Philadelphia Dental Col
lege, second oldest dental school in
America, and has practiced dentistry
twenty-five years, having licenses to
practice in the states of New York,
Pennsylvania, Maine, Illinois, Califor-
MIA and three provinces of Canada,
and is a graduate in dentistry, medi-
cine and drugs.
1t is a fact that the dental board
has absolute arbitrary power which
jcannot be controlled by any court oi
law in the state of Oregon, and this
monopolistic power is un-American
and for this principle l am fighting
This board claims that DR.. Parker
could not pass. Then if they were
honest, and he was really incompe
tent, why did they not publish his
examination papers. which he urged
them to do, offering to pay all eX
pense of publication?
The only means dentist from an
other state has, if turned down by
this arbitrary board, is to APPEAL
TO THE PEOPLE, WHICH DR.
PARKER IS NOW DOING.
But, mind you, they have reserved
to themselves right to appeal to law
if their licenses are revoked, and il
this is not CLASS LEGISLATION
UNCONSTITUTIONAL, ARBITRARY
and DESPICABLE, and a TRUST il
its most hideous form, though Sc
transparent when understood that il
needs no challenge.
But their opposition is only natur
al. They have the legal grip in Ore
gon and they expect to fight for its
maintenance, and this principle ap
plies to all the professions, trades
and churches. Let anyone get the alb
solute legal control, then any innova
tion in ethics or theology and ;
strong opposition is at once encoun
tered, and in support of these facts
quote from the Literary Digest o
August Is, page 265. The editor il
undertaking to answer the many
queries made by German physicians
through the American Journal o
Clinical Medicine as to why they are
not practicing painless childbirth
when it has bee nso thoroughly dem
onstrated in Germany. The article
says that organized medicine is only
displaying the natural hatred tha
any organized body always has FOL
new ideas, and that no real innova
ton ever originated within the or
ganized constitution of any science
or craft 1t has always come from
some individual, or a non-conformini
group of individuals, and pushed III
way in the teeth of organized oppo
sition. In medicine, in particular, 4
would seem as though this organi,
opposition to innovations which wer,
on the face of them worthy of adop
tion has been a factor of great hin
drance and embarrassment. Aud thi
very branch of medicine of which WI
are now speaking-midwifery-fur
nishes a most conspicuous example.
But in my opinion the article II
the Literary Digest is not quite fair