From Mr I. G. Simpson, FRPharmS
SIR,—The comments of Mr Rawlings (PJ, November 6, p749) on Dr Cule's lecture at the British Pharmaceutical Conference on Wesley's 'Primitive physic' (PJ, October 2, p737) reminded me that, hidden away in a drawer, I have what I believe to be an original copy of the 1780 edition of the book. It belonged to my great-great-great grandfather, James Gilmore, who was born in 1779, and it was given to me by my grandmother, Lila Graham, who wrote in it the names and addresses of my four ancestors who owned it.
Wesley's 'Primitive physic' is not only a fascinating collection of folk remedies and "receipts", but it also contains, in the preface, the preacher's advice on healthy living and the sensible use of medicines. The 1780 edition also includes the preface to earlier editions published in 1760, 1755 and 1747. In my copy, however, there is no mention of a 1762 edition, referred to by Mr Rawlings, and I would be interested to hear more about that.
In the preface, Wesley commented on two topics which are still relevant today, namely, drug interactions, and the quality of medicines. In the 1747 edition, he wrote: "Experience shews that one thing will cure most disorders, at least as well as twenty put together. Then why do you add the other nineteen? Only to swell the apothecary's bill. Nay, possibly, on purpose to prolong the distemper, that the doctor and he may divide the spoil."
In the 1760 edition, he stated that the medicines which he recommended were "good in their kind, pure, genuine, unsophisticate". He then goes on to say: "But who can be sure of this when the medicines he uses are compounded by an apothecary? Perhaps he has not the drug prescribed by the physician, and so puts in its place ‘what will do as well'. Perhaps he has it, but it is stale and perished, yet ‘you would not have him throw it away; indeed he cannot afford it'. Perhaps he cannot afford to make up the medicines as the dispensatory directs, and sell it at the common price; so he puts in cheaper ingredients, and you take, neither you nor the physician knows what."
These quotations show that Wesley had no great respect for our pharmaceutical ancestors of his day, the apothecaries, even though he clearly had sympathy with their economic difficulties. In today's climate, where we must balance economic reality with clinical governance, we would do well to remember that it is still the quality of the products and the service and advice provided by our profession which will gain us the continuing respect of the population.
Finally, Wesley has some practical advice for both writers and readers of the PJ. "Those who read or write much should learn to do it standing; otherwise it will impair their health." A sobering thought as I sit at my computer!
Ian G. Simpson
Old Marston, Oxford