[To rite EDITOR OP THE " SPECTATOR."
Sin,—Your correspondent of last week, " Blue Pill" (a more appropriate nom de guerre would surely have been "Beecham" or " Cockle " !), is apparently unable to distinguish between a physician's prescription and a box of somebody's pills. For his edification it may be pointed out that the former often represents the experience of a lifetime, while the latter usually consists of a farthing's-worth of aloes. " Blue Pill " complains that he cannot decipher the physician's prescription, and is evidently ignorant of the fact that the prescription simply contains directions for the chemist who is to make it up, and is not—as many seem to think—the private property of the patient, to be used promiscuously by himself and his friends for all the ills the flesh is heir to. "Blue Pill" asks : "Did you ever hear of a doctor administering to himself the drugs he prescribes for his patients P " To this I can reply in the affirmative, and may add that I have often obtained much benefit thereby. The main objection that we medical men have to quack medicines is not, as "Blue Pill" maintains, that they may " accomplish relatively as much good as orthodox medicines," but the fact that patients, after spending all their money on these quack medicines without obtaining relief, come to us to be cured, and have no money left to pay our fees. If "Blue Pill" prefers quack medicines, let him take them by all means, but let him abide by them, and not come to us as a last resource after he has emptied his pockets. We prefer to deal with patients who possess some
degree of intelligence.—I am, Sir, &c., M.D.
Previous page
