MANY of the emails that stream by the thousands into our mailbox have a quote or aphorism at the bottom, or, sometimes, an item of information that the sender wants to spread around.
Here鈥檚 one we found the other day: 鈥淭he American Medical Association鈥檚 Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs is planning a $590,000 initiative to educate doctors about the ethical problems involved in accepting gifts from the drug industry. The initiative is funded by gifts from Eli Lilly and Company, GlaxoSmithKline, Inc., Pfizer, US Pharmaceutical Group, AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, Bayer Corporation, Procter and Gamble Company, and Wyeth Pharmaceutical.鈥�
We were amused when we read this, thinking it was a spoof. But it turns out to be true.
Advertisement
A visit to the AMA website reveals that the council has indeed been involved with these drugs companies 鈥� in a bid to educate them (rather than doctors) about the ethics of giving freebies to physicians.
鈥淭extbooks, modest meals, and other gifts鈥� are fine, we learn, if they 鈥渟erve a genuine educational function鈥�. Pens and notepads are also OK, but nothing of 鈥渟ubstantial value鈥� should be offered and everything should benefit the patient.
It鈥檚 hard to find anything to object to here, though we鈥檙e puzzled how a 鈥渕odest meal鈥� would serve a genuine educational function for a doctor. And further on, the moral line gets still more blurred. How can 鈥渢he use of drug samples for personal or family use鈥� possibly help patients?
The guidelines allow such use 鈥�(i) in emergencies and other cases where the immediate use of a drug is indicated, (ii) on a trial basis to assess tolerance and (iii) for the treatment of acute conditions requiring short courses of inexpensive therapy鈥�.
Doctors will need a degree in moral philosophy as well as advice from their ethics council when they try to sort out the pros and cons of giving drugs to their partners and children in order to 鈥渁ssess tolerance鈥�. Has the AMA blundered into a minefield here?
READER John Etherington enjoyed Paul Marks鈥檚 story about the use of deconstructionist literary theory to expose euphemisms in safety documents that lull people into a false sense of security (7 September, p 12). The example given in the article was the use of the innocuous-sounding word 鈥渟moulderings鈥� for rubbish-fuelled fires like the one that triggered the fatal disaster at King鈥檚 Cross station on the London Underground in 1987.
Etherington asks what other euphemisms conceal lethal realities. He suggests that 鈥渏oy riding鈥� (stealing cars and killing people) is one, and 鈥渃ollateral damage鈥� (bombing innocent civilians) is another. However, his nomination for the worst is 鈥�90 per cent fat free鈥�, meaning 鈥渃ontains 10 per cent fat鈥�. How many cases of obesity and premature death have been helped on their way by this bit of advertising spin, he wonders.
Perhaps readers can provide their own examples of 鈥渓ethal euphemisms鈥�?
IF this doesn鈥檛 mean what it says, what does it mean? Reader Ken Dawes was having problems with his Microtek film scanner and consulted the company website for assistance, only to read: 鈥淚n an effort to provide prompt and efficient technical support to our customers, Microtek technical advisors cannot respond to messages or fax requests for technical support assistance.鈥�
THANKS to Myfanwy Oldershaw for her response to the item we ran about Britain鈥檚 拢2 coin with its depiction of a ring of 19 cogs that, because 19 is an odd number, can only be locked solid (31 August).
Oldershaw pointed us to James Randi鈥檚 website at . In her own words, 鈥淚t is part of the very excellent James Randi Educational Foundation website. Randi invited his readers to solve the puzzle of how to get an uneven number of cogged wheels, arranged in a circle, to move. The results are very interesting (and inventive).鈥�
She is quite right. We particularly liked the first solution: arrange the ring of cogs into a Mobius strip. It sounds like the kind of mystical nonsense that Randi normally debunks, but it happens to be correct.
ANOTHER example of an unfortunately truncated email subject line. 鈥淩efinancing and debt consolidation in 10 days!鈥� ran the full title of a spam that landed in the mail box of reader Guy Robinson. But all he saw when the email appeared in his inbox was 鈥淩efinancing and debt con鈥�. He wondered if his computer knew something he didn鈥檛.
FINALLY, reader Ted White tells us of an offer he decided to decline. He recently received a reminder notice from the vet about vaccinations for his cat. A note at the bottom advertised a workshop that the veterinarypractice was holding, with the cheery notice: 鈥淐ome and learn what it is like to be neutered!鈥�
The operating instructions for an Isis submersible pump 鈥� used, for example, at the bottom of a pond 鈥� advise: 鈥淧lease leave this instruction booklet with the pump as it contains maintenance and safety information.鈥�