On supporting science journalism
If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.
At the recent meeting of the American Medical Association in Richmond, the report of the section on medicine contained the following curious resolution, which was referred to the Judicial Council for report at the next annual meeting: Besolvedy That the spirit of the Code of Ethics forbids a physician from prescribing a remedy controlled by a patent, copyright, or trade mark. This, however, shall except a patent upon a process of manufacture or machinery, provided patent be not used to prevent legitimate competition; and shall also except use of a trade mark used to designate a brand of manufacture, provided that the article so marked be accompanied by working formulae, duly sworn to, and also by a technical, scientific name, under which any one can compete in manufacture of same. It would manifestly be unfair to hold the medical profession of the United States responsible for the sentiments of a resolution not formally passed upon and adopted by the association. So far as appears the resolution expresses the mind of perhaps only a small part of the section in medicine; nevertheless the fact that a resolution so worded could be presented to the association and obtain any countenance whatever, too clearly shows that some of the members at I least are sadly in need of enlightenment with respect to the I policy and ethics of patents, copyrights, and trade marks. Certainly the man that draughted the resolution betrays a i degree of ignorance of the function and practical working of patent rights, copyrights, and trade marks as thoroughgoing as his inacquaintance with the usages of English speech. The wisdom of the general policy of refraining from prescribing any of the secret compounds miscalled patent" medicines, is beyond question. But that class of alleged remedies for disease is entirely without the scope of this resolution as it stands. A patented medicine cannot be of secret composition, since one of the prime conditions of granting letters patent is that the matter patented shall be fully and explicitly published to the world. That a physician ought to know the ingredients of whatever he offers a patient goes without telling; it is desirable also that he should know what effect the several ingredients alone or combined are likely to have upon the human economy under any given circumstances; but it is gravely to be feared that if the general practice of physicians were strictly limited to the administration of remedies under such conditions the majority would find their practice amazingly restrictedpossibly to the advantage of their patients. Be that as it may, it is obviously the physician's duty to administer to his patient in any instance the remedy best suited to the case, so far as he knows; it is his duty also to widen his knowledge of probable or approved remedies to the utmost; and he has no moral or professional right to accept or reject a proposed remedy for any other consideration than the best interests of his patient. The fact that the manufacture or sale of a remedy is controlled by patent, label, or trade mark has nothing to do with the medical aspects of the case. If the remedy is better calculated to benefit the patient than any other remedy known or available, the physician is morally bound to use it, whatever the Code of Ethics or the resolutions of any professional association may have to say in the premises. For the enlightenment of the draughter of the resolution under criticism it may be proper to remark here (1) that it ia. impossible for a patent to be used to prevent legitimate competition;" consequently the exception cuts the ground from under the first clause of theresolutionsofar as it relates to patented remedies, and the subsequent exceptions do the same with respect to labels and trade marks. (2) That the sole function of a trade mark is to designate a brand of manufacture." (3) That a trade mark in no way hinders competition in the manufacture of any article. Stripped of its errors of fact and misconceptions with regard to the purpose of patents, trade marks, and copyrights, there is left of the resolution but one possible idea, which may be expressed in this wi se: Besolved, That a physician should not prescribe an alleged remedy, the composition of which he does not know." Should the association entertain and wish to express a disapprobation of patents, copyrights, and trade marks a resolution to that effect might take some such form as this: " Besolvedy That professional bigotry and prejudice forbid the physician to use any patented remedy, or any remedy obtained by the use of any patented implement or implements manufactured under any patent; or any remedy manufactured by any patented process or machinery, or put up in any package tainted by patent rights, or bearing a copyrighted label, or transported in any vehicle so tainted; or to use any patented surgical or other implement, or any device or implement in the manufacture of which patented tools or processes have been employed; or to make use of any copyrighted book or treatise for study or reference; or (in short) to make use of any modern means or methods in the practice of the healing art, or in preparation for such practice." We have no fear that the associated physicians of the United States will deliberately commit themselves, even by implication, to any such absurdity.
