THE MEDICAL PROFESSION AND THE CHEMISTS.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 13846, 8 March 1907, Page 7

THE MEDICAL PROFESSION AND THE CHEMISTS.

Sin, —Kindly grant 1110 spaco to draw tho attention o[ tho medical gentlemen now assembled in Duncdin to one or two matters •interesting to them, but moro particularly to tho pharmaceutica.l chemist, and which, though not Teforrod to by Dr Barnett in his presidential nddross, have been discussed in the medical world often enough. Dr liarnolt has taken pains to 'draw attention to what no terms "a dangerous and uncalled for intorfcrcnco with tho business of tho duly qualified medical man," in speaking of what is known among chemists as counter practice. Doubtless .ho is correct ill stating' that tlioro is an undesirable minority in tho drug trade who flourish utothc«i>po3, etc., although I question if ■tlioro are three in Otago who aro guilty of -going to such ridiculous extremes. Personally, I only know of one, and I am acquainted with a considerable number in t.he trade. Perhaps I may be pardonedfor referring to tho other side of the question. Chemists also have their little grievances against mombers of tho medical profession, and tho timo is opportuno to bring some of them under the notice of tho annual congress of the British Medical Association (New Zealand Branch), now meeting in Duncdin. Firstly, is it advisable, not to 6ay dangerous, ' that a doctor should dispense his own prescriptions or allow his wifo or his gioom to do so. Who docs what is technically known as "checking" in such cases? Ksory chemist who docs an ordinary amount of prescription-compounding will bear me out that, mistakes in prescriptions —sometimes of u very serious charactcr— arc by no means rare. It. takes years to make a competent pharmaceutical chemist, ami tho average doctor iias not tho timo •nor tho training to (it. him for the task.' Surely medical men should leave the dispensary to tho chemist as much as possible. Again, Dr Barnett very rightly lays slres3 on the desirability of insisting on men hoing compelled to go through a full medical curriculum before being permitted to set, up iu practice, and it is logical to assume that tho argument is sound in tho ease of the pharmacist. llow, then, aro wo to view tho fact that patients arc constantly bcinff told by their doctors lo lake their prescriptions to Mr So-and-So, who is a chemist only by virtue of having kept an open shop two years prior to Iho passing of tho Pharmacy Act. of 1898? Aro wo to conclude that, the pharmaceutical examinations carry no weight, with u largo number of tho medical profession? Let us practise what wo preach, and bo consistent in all things. I will quote a case which occurred as lato as last. week. A chemist, who, liv the way, indulges in a very mild form of counter practice—that is to say. ho oulv treats "trivial eases,"—advised three of liis customers lo consult a doclor. Two out of the threo wore sent lo other chemists to get their prescriptions made up. Can it be wondered at that people get tired of tins kind of thing, and suggest a remedy of their own? T believe Dr Harnett; is endowed with sullicient. business acumen to recognise the tempt atiou here indicated. This brill/;! me lo the next complaint, which is Ihe question of secret commissions. Some of the medical men now visiting Duncdin will recollect the hubbub which occurred in Christchurch not. so very long ago. and diciuists have good reason to Ix'licvc that this most unprofessional method of transacting business is not altogether obsolete in tho colony. Otherwise, how is the fact to be accounted for that some doctors persisl in advising their patients to take their prescriptions to certain dispensaries? Manv medical men do not appear to be aware of the fact that a large percentage of their patients only call 011 them nftor having an interview witli llieir chemist first, and the doctor who indulges in tho luxury of a favourite dispenser generally pavs pretty dearly for it in the long run. Then thero is the ordering of many factory-made pills and potions, the' age and strength of which aro often matters of doubt and uncertainly, and aro frequently tried by the doctor merely as an experiment nfler a visit from a stranger-with a handbag. This is a growing evil. The British Phannacoprcia, notwithstanding its high authority, appears insufiieieiit in our time, and the wholo region of proprietary is ransacked for something for iv case of measles which the duly qualified chemist .-■annot make, and very often cannot supply, .Where are we to draw the lino of ouackerv? Finally, is it presumption 011 the part of i the pharmaceutical chemist to look forward to a timo when his science will bo regarded as a distinct branch of healing knowledge, lo bo elevated lo the dignity of a profession, and demanding its full quota of consideration and respect from the physician and the surgeon alike? Chemists have themselves io blame for a good deal . of the present state of things. A higher standard of general knowledge snould be sought for in selecting apprentices, and a course of pharmaceutical ethics would be advantageous. Men guiliy of unprofessional conduct should be struck off the register and not allowed to carry 011 business. Nevertheless there is full scope for tho medical man to bring about so desirable a condition iu the business which has been adorned by such masters in the art as Martmdale and Squire—l .1111, etc., Duncdin, March 6. CllKMlcus.