Medical Research Cuts Questioned
Daily Observer
S.Q.
Lapius stepped gingerly off the tennis court, drenched with sweat. His shirt clung to his undulating fat. Perspiration drenched his brow. His eyeglasses were misty.
“What
a waste this is,” Lapius said, reaching for a drink and watching the water
drain from him in rivulets.
“What
a waist is right,” I said, “You were a 44 before you started to play, and
you’ll be a 44 as soon as you finish that drink,” I said toweling him off to
prevent the inevitable puddles that develop whenever Lapius is permitted to
perspire in place for any length of time.
“No,
Harry, I was referring to the sweat, perspiration, being a waste.”
“15
minutes of tennis isn’t exactly vigorous, Simon, but I guess it is for you,” I
had remembered seeing him break into a sweat from the effort of cutting a tough
steak. “Come on, get changed. You look like a pile of soiled laundry,” I
walked him into the locker room.
“Incidentally,”
I asked, “why is sweating such a waste?”
“We
will have to conserve it, Harry. It may
fast become a national resource.”
“Your
drink was too strong,” I suggested.
“You
are being perverse, Harry. Or haven’t
you heard?”
“Heard
what?”
“That
the
“You
josh.”
“No,
my boy. Tis truth, verily,” Lapius said
struggling into his pants. “It seems
that some of the excreta and-or secreta of patients was being taken without
informed consent. That is, the researchers
failed to inform the person that his stool, sweat or tears that were being
examined for metabolic studies, we’ll say, on excretory rates and routes for
antibiotics or other chemicals. I guess
one person sued, and won, making the subject fair game for our legal
colleagues.”
“That
is ridiculous, Simon. Do you mean to
tell me that such an important bastion of medical research as
Columbia-Presbytarian would be intimidated by that kind of business?”
“Yes. The civil libertarians feel that so much
could be found out about an individual by examining his excreta, that unless he
gave an informed consent, the research must come to a stop. Word got around that they could show you were
a drug addict, or had some disease or other.
To tell you the truth I don’t know exactly what the problem was, but
apparently someone fussed, and said their sweat or urine or tear drops were
personal property and could not be used indiscriminately for research.”
“So
why not get informed consent, and be done with it. After all, why close down these projects?”
“I
don’t really know. But certainly if you
have to get informed consent, you raise in the patient an index of
suspicion. Maybe they just didn’t want
to bother with the legality of it.”
“But
certainly we seem to be coming full circle.
Between this, and the new rulings about fetal experimentation, research
may well be grinding to a halt, and perhaps we are about to enter a new ‘dark
ages’ where rational thought will be replaced by individual opinion. The effort and money that the
“But
it is a shame to see it coming to an end, that era of subsidy in sciences. If it were to die of attrition, it would be
bad enough, but to die under the strain that the scientists are unworthy
snoopers, or even worse, as is happening in
“I
can remember,” he said, as we were walking out of the locker room, “when
Churchill promised his Englishmen during the early and bitter days of the war,
that he had nothing to offer them but blood, sweat and tears. I’d like to take him up on that offer now.”
“You
can’t just this minute,” I said, as we reached the lobby.
“Why
not?” Lapius asked.
“Take
a look at your feet,” I told him. “You
forgot your shoes.”
He
turned dismayed, to reenter the locker room.
“Of course, they were the other things doctors would examine
experimentally, nail parings and hair.
All off limits now. A pity.”