This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.
Detroit, Mich., April, 1894.
To the Editor:
—Through the Journal of the Association this report has been laid before the profession. Already it has been repudiated in several quarters. The cry is raised "Vote it down! Vote it down!"From the language of Dr. N. S. Davis in the Journal of the Association and the Occidental Medical Journal; of the " Conservative Member;" of Dr. Gould in the Medical News, the reader would infer that the authors of the proposed revision were denizens of the infernal regions and had made a special trip to the world for the purpose of working injury to the medical profession. Satire, invective, ridicule, suspicion, etc., are variously combined in these several communications, but in no one of them is a single reason given to support the belief that the adoption of the Committee's report would fail to benefit the profession.It is interesting to inquire
Connor L. Report on the Revision of the Code of Ethics.. JAMA. 1894;XXII(18):677-678. doi:10.1001/jama.1894.02420970031010