Not only did the demand for morphine create a steady market for the drug, it also created a strong demand for hypodermic needles as well. The 1897 Sears and Roebuck catalogue advertised a hypodermic kit (including a syringe, two needles, two vials, and a carrying case) for a mere $1.50 (quite a bargain, really). Patent medications, largely unregulated at the time, were advertised for the treatment of a wide variety of complaints and, naturally, morphine and opium were popular ingredients. The self-medication that these patent medications made possible certainly aggravated the problem of substance abuse but the lack of formal government controls helped drive sales.
It seems inevitable that alternatives to morphine would become available as medical researchers learned more about the chemical composition of opium. Codeine was first isolated in 1832 by French chemist, Pierre Robiquet, although it proved not to be as popular as morphine. The real breakthrough came in the 1870s when English chemist C.R.A. Wright first isolated the opiate compound that would later be marketed under the brand name of heroin. When Bayer Pharmaceuticals released their product some time later (the name heroin was taken from the German word for heroic, heroisch), it was billed as a perfectly safe alternative to morphine.
And heroin was hardly the only new product available. With the development of chloroform, nitr0us oxide, and vari0us other anesthetics, pain-free surgery and dentistry became all the rage. At the same time, however, there was a growing fear of the social dangers surrounding opiates (including morphine and heroin). Following the Spanish-American War and the American annexation of the Philippines in 1898, public alarm over opium addiction became even more widespread. As a result of U.S. pressure, the first International Opium Commission was held in Shanghai in 1909. A sec0nd meeting was held in 1911 and the first c0mprehensive policy regulating opiate use was signed.
In the United States, anti-drug lobbyists began agitating from more stringent safeguards. Hamilton Wright was appointed as America's first Opium Commissioner in 1908 and, after attending the Shanghai meeting, would comment that "Of all the nations of the world, the United States consumes most habit-forming drugs per capita. Opium, the most pernicious drug known to humanity, is surrounded, in this country, with far fewer safeguards than any other nation in Europe fences it with". Once again, drug abuse was linked to racial unrest as Wright went on to comment that "cocaine is often the direct incentive to the crime of rape by the Negroes of the South and other sections of the country" (while cocaine is not an opiate, the drug reformers insisted on classifying it as a narcotic as part of their platform).
Newspaper editors and academics alike weighed in on the dangers of drug addiction and the horrendous social costs involved. Racism was readily apparent and the editorials were filled with accounts of "drug-crazed, sex mad negroes" and "Chinamen" seducing white women on drugs. Various drug "experts" testified on the proliferation of drug-addicted "Negroes" stalking and attacking white women while under the influence. By 1914, forty-six states had passed legislation regulating or banning opium, morphine, or heroin. The fact that World War One had just broken out in Europe became a factor as well since experts began raising c0ncerns about the cases of Soldier's Disease that had arisen from the Civil War and the possibility of American involvment in the new year leading to more cases.
In 1915, Jeannette Marks published a highly influential article in the American Journal of Public Health describing the "hydra-headed drug curse" following the Civil War and expressed alarm that the problem would shortly resurface. She was als0 the first to suggest that there had been as many as 400,00 morphine addicts following the war although she was given to exaggeration (she had also estimated there being 4,000,000 drug addicts in the U.S. in 1915). While other experts disputed her estimate, the consensus that drug regulation was needed seemed clear enough. After quiet deliberation, the Harrison Narcotics Tax Act was signed into law on December 17, 1914. Technically focusing on taxing narcotics (again, cocaine was included), the act also imposed still penalities for the sale and importation of all narcotics. Although morphine and other opiates could still be prescribed by a physician, the anti-drug era had begun in force.
As for Soldier' Disease, its popularity as a diagnosis began to level off during the 20th century when substance abuse in the military became better understood. Despite the role of the diagnosis in helping to shape U.S. drug policy and the numerous wars that have been fought in the past century, the use of a distinct diagnosis for returning soldiers addicted to pain medication has been largely discarded in the clinical literature. While drug experts continue to disagree on the actual number of Civil War morphine addicts (the estimates range from 45,000 to 400,000). Still, the controversy remains over how any valid estimate could ever be made given the lack of reliable data from that era.
What isn't in dispute however, is that substance abuse among military personnel continues to be a political minefield regardless of the actual medical needs of soldiers dealing with chronic pain or posttraumatic stress. Despite research initiatives by the National Institute on Drug Abuse and the Department of Veteran's Affairs, the substance abuse problems that returning soldiers face are still waiting to be solved.
Please cite your references for the assertions you make in your essay. It would be particularly helpful if you could cite Army medical literature from the late 1800's as opposed to documents from the WWI era/Prohibition era 50 years after the Civil War.
Please review the contrary view of the Myth of Soldier's Disease
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/history/soldis.htm
Posted by: DC | October 09, 2016 at 10:39 AM