54 Proceedings of Indiana Academy of Science 
fail of cure because they cannot afford the cost of the deception and 
because they have not been told how to cure themselves at home, at 
no cost at all. 
* ce * * * * 
Enter now the Patent Medicine faker. This individual has been 
with us for a very long time and he bids fair to favor us with his 
presence for some time to come. Again we notice the essential character- 
istic of the faker family,—the ability to confuse science with un-science, 
truth with a lie, real medicine with pseudo-medicine. The patent medi- 
cine faker relies for his success chiefly upon (a) the almost universal 
knowledge that scientific medical practice has proved its worth to man- 
kind, (b) the almost universal ignorance of what is and what is not 
scientific medical practice, (c) quite universal credulity and (d) the 
strange fascination that seems to be possessed by mankind for self- 
dosing. And his reliance is not misplaced. How we love to be ill so 
that we may become well and how we love to prescribe for ourselves,— 
or so we think we are doing, while in reality we are responding to 
psychic suggestion, so cunningly conveyed to us by paid advertisements 
in newspapers, frequently masquerading as news matter and through 
which the patent medicine faker prescribes for us. 
It has been repeatedly pointed out that the worst feature of the 
patent medicine evil is the fact that money is so frequently squandered 
for worthless, or worse than worthless, materials by those who can 
least afford its loss, and that these same people are so frequently the 
ones who most need the advice of wise, well-trained physicians. Why 
self-respecting druggists continue to vend the stuff and why self-re- 
specting newspapers continue to accept money for concealed and uncon- 
cealed advertisements, used for the deception of the credulous,—passes 
my understanding. But I long ago gave up trying to understand a 
number of things. 
* * A * * * 
Now, with fear and trembling I arise to pay my respects to the 
Religious faker. My trepidation is based upon the knowledge that any 
man of science who essays to discuss any matter connected with re- 
ligion treads upon dangerous ground. People are extremely sensitive 
concerning the so-called materialism of our scientists. ‘Atheism in the 
colleges and universities” is a phrase with which to conjure. Let me 
say at the very outset that I am not going to attack religion. Neither 
shall I defend religion. I shall not discuss religion in any way but I 
am going to say a few things about religious fakers of science. And 
again please notice (I am very particular here, of necessity) that we 
have consistently discussed fakers of science as men who pervert or 
misapply the truths of science in order to bolster up any case which 
they desire to make, whether this be through ignorance or ‘with malice 
aforethought”. I believe I am right in maintaining that it is no com- 
pliment to religious ideals to fake anything, anywhere in their support. 
The “conflict” between science and religion is at least as old as 
science. Scientific men, accustomed as they are to rigid self-discipline 
in methods of thought, basing their conclusions upon demonstrated or 
demonstrable facts, have long manifested impatience concerning the 
