The second greatest benefit to mankind?

Abstract

In 1739 Samuel Johnson wrote an essay on the life of Dr Hermann Boerhaave, Professor of Physic at the University of Leiden, who died in 17381. Boerhaave, born 11 years after Harvey's death, could be said to have been influenced by Harvey in that he favoured experimental natural philosophy as the gateway to scientific medicine2. He was denied entry into the church because he was accused wrongly of being a follower of the philosopher Baruch Spinoza, regarded as a heretic because he criticised established religious practices; this in spite of strongly supporting the love of God and humanity. Boerhaave decided to become a physician as he was, in Johnson's words, 'equally qualified for a profession, not indeed of equal dignity or importance, but which must undoubtedly claim the second place amongst those which are the greatest benefit to mankind'. It is this claim that I wish to examine. Can we still claim this regard for our profession? Is the medicine we practise, and the way we practise, of the greatest benefit to mankind, and how do we ensure that it is?