News of the successful use of ether anesthesia on October 16, 1846, spread rapidly
through the world. Considered one of the greatest medical discoveries, this triumph
over man's cardinal symptom, the symptom most likely to persuade patients to seek
medical attention, was praised by physicians and patients alike. Incredibly, this
option was not accepted by all, and opposition to the use of anesthesia persisted
among some sections of society decades after its introduction. We examine the social
and medical factors underlying this resistance. At least seven major objections to
the newly introduced anesthetic agents were raised by physicians and patients. Complications
of anesthesia, including death, were reported in the press, and many avoided anesthesia
to minimize the considerable risk associated with surgery. Modesty prevented female
patients from seeking unconsciousness during surgery, where many men would be present.
Biblical passages stating that women would bear children in pain were used to discourage
them from seeking analgesia during labor. Some medical practitioners believed that
pain was beneficial to satisfactory progression of labor and recovery from surgery.
Others felt that patient advocacy and participation in decision making during surgery
would be lost under the influence of anesthesia. Early recreational use of nitrous
oxide and ether, commercialization with patenting of Letheon, and the fighting for
credit for the discovery of anesthesia suggested unprofessional behavior and smacked
of quackery. Lastly, in certain geographical areas, notably Philadelphia, physicians
resisted this Boston-based medical advance, citing unprofessional behavior and profit
seeking. Although it appears inconceivable that such a major medical advance would
face opposition, a historical examination reveals several logical grounds for the
initial societal and medical skepticism.