QUACKERY IN DENTISTRY.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XXXIV, Issue 11320, 2 September 1899, Page 5

QUACKERY IN DENTISTRY.

(Prom the London' Dental Brief, July, J899.) The Dental Association of the Pro. vlnoo of Q uebeo have been working lot the overthrow of oharlstanism and quackery, while the dental profession on this Bide the border have contented themselves with writing, resolving, protesting, and ' orating ' about it. From every standpoint the report in question and the regulations of the Board of Examiners Issued in connection there-. with make 'mighty interesting reading.' In England, also, action is the order of the day, and a law making illegal the practice of dentistry by dental companies has been proposed and will probably be enacted. These efforts on behalf of professional decenoy come on a mnrky nlg-ht like the freshening brofz^ which bids as dream of dawn and a day of better things. It is true that the obataoloa are many and formidable which here bar the way to effective reform of tbe abuses in ques. tion. In natural antagonism to It are the business instincts of a oommeroial people, to whom advertising is simply a legitimate and Indispensable means for Becming business suocess, and who, although they know that it is the man with cheap and inferior goods who, by the very inferiority of his ware, is com. pelled to advertise most largely, see nothing intrinsically harmful in the adoption of such methods by the cheap and inferior professional man. | Tben there is the inatinot for individual freedom common to the Englishspeaking race ; an instinct so strong that license is too often condoned that liberty may be safeguarded, and co in. eradioable tbat it is woven into the warp and woof of the whole social fabric Henoe, in seeking legislation against quaokery, the first and fundamental consideration is whether the general interests of society demand restrictive legislation against quaokery and its methods. Broidly considered, they unquestionably do. First, there is the consideration that, as carried on in its mora obnoxious forms by glaring signs and postera and by obtrusive show oases filled with ghastly trophies of bulging art and preposterous pract'oe, not only are all refined sensibilities outraged, bat an offence ii committed against public tsste and deoenoy,whioh should no more be tolerated in a civilised community th»n is the wanton defaoement of natural scenery in countries sufficiently far advanced in civilisation to no longer sacrifice publio deoorum to the fetish of a factitious freedom. Second, there is the fact that the methodi of the advertising quack are notoriously fraudulent, and that, an a cites, they are bo irresponsible that their victims, drawn chiefly from the poorer, and therefore more helpless, classes of the oommunity, are praotioally without redress whon, as is usually the oase, they are made the victims of fraud or malpractice. Third, there Is the still more grave consideration that the people at large are of themselves unable to measure the merits or demerits of praotitionera of the bealiug art in any of its branches, except by experience, gained often at great loss, sometimes at the oost of human life ; and henoe that, for the safety and wellbeing of the oommunity, it ia supremely important that interests so often involving the issue of life and death, and in wbioh the patient is so much at the meroy of the praotittoner he employs, should be confined only to the hands of men of the highest skill, training and integrity, and that all reasonable regulations enacted by professional organisations to maintain such a high standard should be sustained by law. Recording the general question of advertising iv* its relations to ethios, there is this to be said, that, at their best, self-praise and oelf advertiaing by professional men have never been held in very bigh repute, and the consensus of opinion, lay and professional, is that to be even tolerable it must not be blatant; that, for the sake of mere decency, its unabashed nudity should be cloaked under at least Borne soanty figuent of modest drapery. From the purely professional standpoint, the cbief argument against displaying advertising in all its forms is (hat, if praoticed equally by all, it ceases, afl an agenoy for gain, to be effeotive for anyj if practised by the few, it ceases to be just to those who refrain. It is quite evident that if in a given community every professional man advertises on an equal scale, no one would be bettered, except the sigo painter or the printer; that, if the advertisements were unequal, the gain would go to the one commanding the most spuae and making the most display ; hence, in the long run, not to the man of most merit, but to the man with most money. The greater and greater domination of money in controlling all •venues to commercial success is, to say the lrast, not so unmixed a good tbat its paramount control over professional advancement need be desired. The faot is that the great mass of the dental profession are reputable, self-re-spepting praotitionera, content to serve the publio faithfully and conscientiously and to await the reward to whioh trae merit is always entitled, and which, as a rule, it is Bure to reoeive. Outside of the large cities and town* it is only here and there men are found who, for the sake of a possibly snifter gain, are willing to outrage the proprieties, and bring not only themselves but the whole profession into disrepute. A? to the broad question qf the reason - ableness of restrictions upan professional advertising, there is, within certain limits, room far honest difference of opinion; but regarding the praolioeß most obnoxious and most complained of, no deoent man, lay or professional, can withold a verdict of utter condemnation. The jurisprudence of the Uaited States, aa well as of Canada, is based upon that common law of England, whioh his been fittingly characterised as "the perfeotion of common sense." If legislative restriction of quaokery oan be enaoted and enforced in England, where, even though class distinctions are still too sharply defined, individual rights are guarded with a aleepless viliganoe and a dogged determination whioh we, In this land of corporate insolence and monopolistic aggression would do well t) emulate, surely there oan be no insuperable constitutional barrier to scouring similar reforms ia the several States of the Union.' ab precedents the enaotments in England and Qanada will be invaluable aids In that struggle for deoent professionalism whioh is inevitable it dentistry, as a profession, is to nurvive, and which, we trust, will not be longer delayed.