Sir William Osler was characteristically outspoken on conflicts of interest. In Aequinimitas he referred to keeping the practitioner “out of the clutches of the arch enemy of his professional independence—the pernicious literature of our camp followers, a literature increasing in bulk....The profession has no more insidious foe than the large borderland pharmaceutical houses.” 1 He proposed as an “antidote to the corroding influence of Mammon ... the presence in the community of a body of men devoted to science, living for investigation and caring nothing for the lust of the eyes and the pride of life.” 1
What would he have said about today when many such persons are, to some extent “on the take”? Would he not have concurred with the idea that the blandishments of commerce can predispose an investigator to gratitude? Is it too much to suggest that gratitude, at times a strong feeling, is hardly the stuff of which resisting “the lust of the eyes and the pride of life” is made?
I have always considered Aequinimitas a weapon in keeping the practice of medicine from being tarred with the brush of commerce. Recently, my enthusiasm suffered a reverse when I discovered an inscription in the copy that I own. It reads: “Dear Doctor, We are presenting to you the accompanying volume of addresses by Sir William Osler .... We hope that, as you read this book, you will appreciate and share Sir William’s inspiration, his breadth of vision, and, above all, his persistent search for truth.” The signatory, of some 45 years ago, is one of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies.
Footnotes
We welcome articles up to 600 words on topics such as A memorable patient, A paper that changed my practice, My most unfortunate mistake, or any other piece conveying instruction, pathos, or humour. If possible the article should be supplied on a disk. Permission is needed from the patient or a relative if an identifiable patient is referred to.
References
- 1.Osler W. Aequinimitas. 3rd edition. New York: The Blakiston Company.