only by Charles Marchand, chemist,” and is {“}an absolute cure for
dyspepsia, catarrh of the stomach, ulcer of the stomach, heart-burn,”
etc. The label further reads: “This remedy is positively harmless.
By destroying the microbian element in the stomach it prevents the
fermentation of food and stimulates digestion.” An examination of
medical literature fails to reveal any basis for these claims. While
glycerin possesses some antiseptic properties, it is evident that
the glycerin which constitutes 90 per cent. of this remedy is not
the agent that gives the glycozone such phenomenal virtues. General
literature contains nothing that would indicate that glyceric acid
in any quantity, with or without glycerin, possesses these miraculous
properties. If by “microbian element” is meant microbic organisms, the
statement is without foundation. There is nothing in this product which
possesses these bactericidal powers.
The circular which accompanied a trade package envelops the preparation
in an air of mystery. Derivation from, or close relation to, ozone and
hydrogen peroxid is vaguely hinted at, without definite assertion.
Thus, the chief therapeutic properties of glycozone and hydrozone are
compared as follows:
“Hydrozone instantly destroys the microbian element, leaving the
tissues beneath in a healthy condition.”
“Glycozone acts more slowly, but not less certain as a stimulant to
healthy granulations.”
[Illustration: Much-reduced photographic reproduction of one of the
older Glycozone advertisements. Attention is directed to the false
claim that this nostrum is “glycerin combined with ozone.”]
There is no similarity between the action of hydrozone, which is a
hydrogen peroxid preparation, and glycozone, which consists of a
mixture of glycerin and glyceric acid. The representation is false
and misleading. The following statement, also, is an unwarranted
exaggeration of the facts:
“As an internal medication in fermentation of food, catarrhal and
inflammatory conditions of the stomach, and intestinal disorders,
its action is prompt and effective, giving immediate relief to the
patient.”
The following is another illustration of the vague statements made:
After asserting that Glycozone is hygroscopic and that it will
deteriorate by absorption of water unless securely corked, it is
stated that “Its healing properties increase with age.” Whatever
mysterious ingredient there may be present in this mixture to justify
the statement that the healing properties increase with age can only
be conjectured. To humbug the patient further, the circular advises him
to use only a “silver, glass or hard rubber spoon.”--(_From the Journal
A. M. A., June 5, 1909._)
GARDNER’S SYRUP OF HYDRIODIC ACID
Report to the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry
The following report on Gardner’s Syrup of Hydriodic Acid was
submitted to the Council by a subcommittee:
This product was first taken under consideration in February,
1906. Reference to several committees was necessary, on account
of the peculiar claims for the pharmaceutical, and especially the
therapeutic, superiority of this preparation. At this time, as the
Council did not have the necessary facilities for investigating
therapeutic claims, the product was approved by the Council.
Since this time, however, the manufacturers have laid especial
stress in their advertisements on some highly improbable claims,
stating, for instance, that this Syrup of Hydriodic Acid possesses
“all the advantages, with none of the objectionable symptoms caused
by potassium iodid, or other forms of iodin medication.” To one with
even an elementary knowledge of chemistry, the absurdity of this
statement should be evident. The alkaline reaction of the tissues
makes it impossible that hydriodic acid should persist as such in the
body. In fact, the iodin must circulate in precisely the same form,
whether administered originally as potassium iodid or as hydrogen
iodid. The qualitative identity of the therapeutic actions is further
proof of this fact, were such needed.
Since the most important objectionable symptoms of iodid medication
arise after the absorption of the drugs, and since hydrogen iodid is
conceded to be readily absorbed, it is evident that these symptoms
must be equally liable to occur with hydrogen iodid as with potassium
iodid, provided that equivalent doses of iodin are administered. An
apparent difference in clinical results would arise if one drug were
habitually given in smaller doses than the other. Since, however, the
iodin is present in the body in precisely the same form, whether it
is administered as a hydrogen iodid or potassium iodid, it is evident
that a given degree of therapeutic effect would correspond to an
identical tendency to iodism, whichever drug was used. If, as appears
to be the case, the use of hydriodic acid is commonly restricted to
those cases in which only minimal doses of iodin are required, the
relative infrequency, or even absence of symptoms with such doses
would not prove that the drug itself is less apt to cause them than
is the potassium salt.
These facts are in reality self-evident; but since the Council now
has proper facilities for obtaining the views and experiences of
clinicians, it voted to submit the statement in question to its staff
of clinical consultants, and to be guided by their advice.
OPINIONS OF THE CLINICAL STAFF
The following is an epitome of the replies of the eleven members of
this staff who had used the article or who expressed an opinion to
the questions sent out by the Council:
1. QUERY: “Do you think it possible that such a preparation could be
devoid of the usual effects of iodin preparations?”
Eight reply that they consider this, _a priori_, impossible; three
stamp the statement as highly improbable, but do not care to say
that it would be impossible. One of the correspondents remarks:
“While distinctly taking the position that under many conditions
we must accept clinical results which we find not explainable by
our theoretical knowledge, where the conditions are so simple as in
this case and where we know that the iodin, whether administered as
hydrogen iodid or potassium iodid, must behave in the same way, after
absorption, I believe that no properly educated and correct thinking
physician can or will, after due consideration, fail to reject the
claims of superiority made by the proprietors of this preparation.”
2. QUERY: “Would you consider it necessary to make clinical
experiments to settle this question?”
Seven of the correspondents consider this superfluous; four of these
have had some experience with the article. Four, who have not used
this product, consider a clinical test advisable. Under Query 3 we
discuss the results of such tests.
3. QUERY: “When using Gardner’s Syrup of Hydriodic Acid, have you
ever noticed from it any of the objectionable effects of iodin
preparations?”
Six of the correspondents have not used it, or are uncertain whether
or not they used the product made by Gardner. One correspondent
remarks: “Never used it. Repelled by claims of superiority which
exaggerate disadvantages of potassium iodid and overlook the small
amount of iodin used in the preparation advertised.” The five
clinicians who have prescribed the preparation report as follows:
1. Objectionable iodin effects in two cases, both patients being
intolerant of all iodin preparations. 2. Has only prescribed it once
or twice, but thinks he has seen iodism in one case, some years ago;
does not recall clearly. 3. No; but has used this make very little,
and then always in very small but continued doses. 4. No, always used
it in small doses. 5. Yes, several cases in children; typical coryza,
etc., with doses of three drams three times a day.
CONCLUSIONS: It appears that typical iodism occurred in several
cases, after doses corresponding to 10 grains or less of potassium
iodid per day, and this is a rather limited clinical material.
Objectionable iodin effects are, therefore, not uncommon. Several
correspondents remark that the relative infrequency of iodism is
easily explainable by the fact that syrup is rarely employed in
conditions which demand an active iodin medication and that it is,
therefore, always taken in small doses. In fact, the main if not the
only point of superiority of the syrup appears to be in its flavor.
These clinical opinions and experiences, therefore, are in complete
agreement with the judgment of the committee, namely, that the
therapeutic claims made by the manufacturers for this article are
exaggerated and misleading.
OTHER MISSTATEMENTS
The above is by no means the only misstatement in the printed matter
issued by this manufacturer. In the publication, “The Applications
of Iodin,” issued in 1907, there occur the following misleading
statements which, since they refer to plainly chemical facts, did not
require submission to the clinical staff:
That the administration of potassium iodid after meals greatly
impairs its physiologic action “by its chemical union with the
various food products” (page 19). So far as the committee knows,
potassium iodid does not combine with the food products in the
stomach.
“Iodid of potassium, having an alkaline reaction, neutralizes the
hydrochloric acid in the gastric secretions, causing indigestion,
loss of appetite and depression” (page 19). The United States
Pharmacopeia states, under Potassii Iodidum: “Its aqueous solution
is neutral or has a slightly alkaline reaction on litmus paper.” The
slight occasional alkalinity would be physiologically insignificant,
and it is absurd to claim that this alkalinity causes “indigestion,
loss of appetite and depression.”
“The dose of iodid of iron is so small that the amount of iodin
contained therein is of little advantage” (page 19). As a matter of
fact, the pharmacopeial average dose (1 c.c.) of the Syrup of Iodid
of Iron contains as much iodin (0.85 grains) as a teaspoonful of
Gardner’s Syrup of Hydriodic Acid (0.83 grains).
“In hydriodic Acid the iodin is in combination with hydrogen, one
of the elements of the natural secretions of the body, and is,
therefore, in physiologic harmony” (page 21). No comment is needed.
It is implied elsewhere (page 29) that potassium iodid decomposes
more readily, with the liberation of iodin, than does hydrogen
iodid. This is contrary to the prevailing opinion, and would require
definite evidence before it could be accepted. It is also stated the
large doses of potassium iodid in syphilis are necessary, because the
gastric decomposition prevents complete absorption. This is certainly
untrue, for potassium iodid is absorbed almost quantitatively.
These, and numerous other misstatements, constitute violations of
Rule 6; and it is, therefore, recommended that Gardner’s Syrup of
Hydriodic Acid be removed from the list of remedies approved by the
Council; it is further recommended that this report be published.
The Council postponed final action on the report, pending its
submission to R. W. Gardner. This having been done, and the reply of
Mr. Gardner submitted to the Council, the above report was adopted and
ordered published.
W. A. Puckner, Secretary.
(_From The Journal A. M. A., Nov. 14, 1908._)
HYPEROL
Report of the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry
The Purdue Frederick Company, exploiters of Gray’s Glycerine Tonic,
have recently been advertising to the medical profession a nostrum
called Hyperol. The following report to the Council, by the referee,
was adopted and its publication authorized.
W. A. Puckner, Secretary.
According to the label, Hyperol is “A Utero-Ovarian Corrective and
Tonic.” The circular accompanying the trade package states that it is:
“Indicated in all functional diseases of women such as: Amenorrhea,
Dysmenorrhea, Menorrhagia, Metrorrhagia, Subinvolution, and in all
conditions requiring a utero-ovarian corrective and tonic.”
From another circular we learn that:
“Hyperol is a combination of Hydrastine, Aloin, Iron, Apiol and
Ergotin. Its components to a certain extent will indicate its
action, but the therapeutic effects of each ingredient seem to
be augmented to an unusual degree by use in this particular
combination. The proportions of each have been determined by
extensive clinical experimentation, and the formula seems to be
exactly balanced to produce the best therapeutic effects in all
derangements of the utero-ovarian functions.”
This “formula” is not very enlightening and a physician who wrote for
further details was told that Hyperol contained:
Hydrastin 1/40 gr.
Aloin 1/12 gr.
Iron salts 3 gr.
Apiol (Special) 3 ♏
Ergotin 1 gr.
And excipients.
If this is correct, then, so far as its active ingredients are
concerned, Hyperol is but a mixture of well-known drugs, having
contradictory properties. According to the claims in the circular
quoted above, it is useful both in amenorrhea and in menorrhagia. The
mixture is as unscientific as it is unnecessary. It cannot be adapted
to any individual case; when ergot is indicated, apiol would naturally
be contra-indicated; if aloes is appropriate, hydrastis may defeat the
object sought. It is unnecessary because no intelligent physician would
prescribe such a combination of drugs in any given case. The claims
are exaggerated, improbable and foolish. Hyperol conflicts with the
following rules of the Council:
_Rule 4_, in that statements on the label and in the circular enclosed
with the trade package advertise it to the public in the treatment of
diseases.
_Rule 6_, in that exaggerated and unwarranted claims are made for its
therapeutic qualities.
_Rule 8_, in that the name of this pharmaceutical mixture fails to
disclose the potent constituents.
_Rule 10_, in that it is unscientific.
It is recommended that publication of this report be authorized to call
attention to the unscientific character of such complex mixtures.
[Editor’s Note: Hyperol is advertised in _American Medicine_ and the
_St. Paul Medical Journal_.]--(_From The Journal A. M. A., April 18,
1914._)
INGLUVIN
Report of the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry
A subcommittee of the Council reported that unwarranted claims and
misrepresentation were made for Ingluvin by its manufacturers,
William R. Warner & Co., recommended that the preparation be refused
recognition and that the report be submitted to Warner & Co. for action.
The report was submitted to the firm, and after waiting one month and
no acknowledgement or reply having been received, the Council directed
its publication. It is as follows:
REPORT ON INGLUVIN
Ingluvin is manufactured by W. R. Warner & Co., chemists, Philadelphia,
Pa. The printed matter contains numerous claims and representations of
which the following are specimens:
“A positive specific for indigestion, dyspepsia and the most
effective remedy in obstinate cases of vomiting of gestation....
A specific for vomiting in pregnancy in doses of from 10 to 20
grains, and a potent and reliable remedy for the cure of marasmus,
cholera infantum, indigestion, dyspepsia, and sick stomach
caused from debility of that organ. It is superior to the pepsin
preparations since it acts with more certainty, and effects cures
where they fail.... The natural glycocholic acid in Ingluvin is the
active principle and the most efficient agent in the treatment of
all stomachic and enteric disorders.”
Two samples were purchased at different times in the open market and on
examination found to consist essentially of powdered meat fiber mixed
with what appeared to {be} a membranous tissue resembling the lining
of a gizzard. Both samples on being tested by the method prescribed by
the U. S. Pharmacopeia for estimating the strength of pepsin were found
to possess little, if any, proteolytic activity. In order to determine
whether or not the lining of a fowl’s gizzard possesses proteolytic
action, a fresh gizzard was secured, the lining washed slightly with
water, then removed and on using one-half of same in place of pepsin as
prescribed by the Pharmacopeial method, it was found to digest 10 grams
of albumin within the time limit. Pepsin, when properly kept, does not
lose its strength to any material extent.
A careful examination was made for the presence of glycocholic acid,
claimed to be the active principle of Ingluvin, but its presence could
not be established. Furthermore, the anatomic relations of the fowl are
such as to preclude its presence.
The above shows that Ingluvin does not possess nearly as much
proteolytic activity as ordinary saccharated pepsin recognized by the
1880 Pharmacopeia, which was prepared on the basis of digesting 300
times its weight of egg albumin. Inasmuch as no glycocholic acid is
present in Ingluvin, it would seem that saccharated pepsin would be far
more efficacious in treating the abnormal conditions for which Ingluvin
is recommended in the advertising circulars. Furthermore, the claims
made for the preparation are grossly extravagant.
A communication from Warner & Co. has been received since the above
report was adopted, in which it is stated: “The reason that previous
letter was not replied to was because we were desirous of securing all
the information possible on the subject. Since that time we have made
considerable research and also made laboratory investigation, and are
enclosing the accumulated data with diagram of a part of the alimentary
canal showing the esophagus, crop and gizzard.”
Much of the other matter submitted is immaterial. The following, so
far as it means anything, seems to confirm the correctness of the
report of the Council’s referee that Ingluvin is practically devoid of
proteolytic activity: “... the therapeutic activity must be due to the
bitter property, rather than any proteolytic activity, and it probably
increases, thereby, the functional activity of the stomach, by which
the normal digestive process is increased. Ingluvin in a 0.4 per cent.
hydrochloric acid solution at 37 to 40 C. or if mixed with an aqueous
solution of pepsin under the same conditions possesses an acrid, bitter
taste and increases the secretion of the saliva and this is practically
the same condition as when in the stomach, it no doubt stimulates the
depressed mucosa peptic glands and increases gastric solution.”
W. A. Puckner, Secretary.
COMMENTS
The fallacies attending the use of digestive ferments in most stomach
diseases have been previously noted in The Journal.[53] In most
digestive disorders a deficiency of the digestive ferment has not
been proved. In cases in which pepsin is lacking, its administration
is valueless unless it is combined with large doses of hydrochloric
acid, and it is doubtful whether this combination is either necessary
or conspicuously useful. There is, however, something so alluring
about medication by digestive ferments which are assumed to supply a
physiologic need, that since their discovery they have formed a fertile
field for the activity of the manufacturer of proprietaries. As by
scientific laboratory tests, it is possible to determine whether a
given preparation has digestive power, the manufacturers of Ingluvin
avoid this point by claiming that the remedy acts, not on the food,
but on the stomach itself. That remedies may exist which act as
stimulants to the digestive secretions can not be denied, although at
the present time this power has not been satisfactorily demonstrated.
The proprietors of Ingluvin, finding that proteolytic activity is not
to be attributed to this preparation of chickens’ gizzards, announce a
new therapeutic fact in the claim that “the natural glycocholic acid
in Ingluvin is the active principle and the most efficient agent in
the treatment of all stomachic and enteric disorders. According to
the report made to the Council there is no glycocholic acid in this
preparation, nor is it possible, from the anatomic arrangements of
the fowl’s digestive apparatus, for it to get there. By all the tests
which can be applied to determine its value this preparation is of
much less value in digestive disorders than saccharated pepsin, which
was discontinued in the Pharmacopeia because of its inferiority to the
other forms of the ferment.
[53] Feb. 2, 1907, p. 415, and Feb. 9, 1907, p. 521.
The repudiation, by the manufacturers, of the more absurd claims made
for Ingluvin, shows the need of maintaining an attitude of healthy
skepticism toward the advertised therapeutic virtues of proprietary
preparations. If a physician is disposed to use digestive ferments,
he should give preference to the official preparations, and ferments
from other sources should be required to stand the exact tests
which demonstrate the worthlessness of so many preparations on the
market.--(_From The Journal A. M. A., July 11, 1908._)
INTESTINAL ANTISEPTIC W-A
Report of the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry
The Council voted that Intestinal Antiseptic W-A be refused
recognition, and that the publication of the following report be
authorized.
W. A. Puckner, Secretary.
The Abbott Alkaloidal Company advertises “Intestinal Antiseptic W-A” as
“... A scientifically blended and physiologically adjusted mixture,
of the pure sulphocarbolates of calcium, sodium and zinc, grs. 5,
with bismuth subsalicylate, gr. 1-4 and aromatics.”
This formula is in conflict with Rule 1 in that it does not state in
what proportion the sulphocarbolates are present.
The name “Intestinal Antiseptic W-A” is in conflict with Rules 4 and 8,
since it is therapeutically suggestive.
The preparation is in conflict with Rules 6 and 10, in that exaggerated
claims are made for it, no evidence being submitted to prove the
superior value of the mixture.
The most serious of these conflicts consists in the exaggerated and
misleading therapeutic claims. The advertisements say:
“This combination has no equal as an antiseptic and inhibitive
agent in typhoid fever, diarrhea, dysentery,” etc.
“Numerous cleverly devised and scientifically constructed
intestinal antiseptics have been introduced to the profession, but
not one of them has ever rivaled for one moment these salts in
popularity.”
“... we are convinced that no small share of the credit for the
reduction of the death rate in infantile diarrheas is due to
the widespread application of this general method of treatment,
associated of course with the calomel clean-out and the regulation
of diet, now known to be essential.”
“But the use of the sulphocarbolates is not restricted to diseases
of the alimentary canal, although in the summer diarrheas,
gastric fermentation, intestinal indigestion, typhoid fever,
dysentery--indeed in all alimentary disturbances--it is the
one essential remedy. It is also indicated in practically all
infectious diseases.”
“Typhoid Fever (in this disease the W-A Intestinal Antiseptic is of
great value; used early, with the proper synergistic cleanout, it
will often cut short the disease).”
These extreme claims exceed the limits of permissible optimism, unless
they are supported by strong dependable evidence. They contrast sharply
with the low esteem in which the phenolsulphonates (sulphocarbolates)
are generally held. To accept these claims, and to justify encouraging
physicians to rely on them, it would be necessary to establish:
First, that feasible concentrations have a distinct antiseptic action
on cultures of intestinal bacteria. This experiment could be easily
made, but the claims do not seem to be based on evidence of this kind.
Second, that the preparation actually checks putrefaction in the
intestines. There are several methods by which this proof may be
attempted; but the claims do not appear to be based on evidence of this
kind.
Third, that the preparation actually has a favorable influence on
the progress of diseases. This sort of evidence is exposed to so
many fallacies that it would have to be gathered very carefully and
critically, duly discounting the effect of other treatment; for
instance, by comparison with similar cases which do not receive this
preparation. This is especially important; and yet we find directions
to use this preparation in conjunction with active cathartic treatment,
which in itself has considerable influence on the conditions for which
this preparation is recommended. No evidence of this kind is presented.
The testimonials contained in the advertisements cannot be considered
as serious evidence. None present any indication of accurate record
or proper control of conditions, or of the performance of control
observations. They are superficial impressions, to which little or no
weight can be attached.
It is recommended that Intestinal Antiseptic W-A be considered
ineligible for New and Nonofficial Remedies.--(_From The Journal
A. M. A., Dec. 19, 1914._)
BANNERMAN’S INTRAVENOUS SOLUTION
Report of the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry
Bannerman’s Intravenous Solution (Wm. Bannerman and Co., Chicago) was
refused recognition because vague, indefinite and misleading statements
were made regarding its composition, because it was recommended for
anemia, tuberculosis and syphilis under grossly exaggerated and
unwarranted claims and because the intravenous injection of complex
and indefinite mixtures is unscientific and dangerous. Notice of the
action of the Council having been sent to the Bannerman Company, the
firm submitted a revised statement of composition and also a revised
advertising circular.
The claim is made that Bannerman’s Intravenous Solution “is a compound
of only the purest and proven efficient U. S. P. drugs.” According to
the latest statement:
Each 10 c.c. of Bannerman’s Solution contains:
Hydrargyri Albuminas
Mercury Content 1 1-9 Gr. or 0.075 Gm.
Ferri Albuminas
Iron Content 4 1-4 Grs. or 0.286 Gm.
Sodii Chloridum 6 1-5 Grs. or 0.412 Gm.
Calcii Salicylicum 4 Grs. or 0.26 Gm.
Guaiacol 4 Grs. or 0.26 Gm.
Creosote (Beechwood) 5 Grs. or 0.32 Gm.
The solvent is said to be distilled water.
The formula is unsatisfactory in several particulars. The stated
amounts of some of the ingredients are in excess of their solubility in
water; the nature and amount of albumin contained in the “Hydrargyri
Albuminas” and “Ferri Albuminas” are not given; the claim that the
solution contains only U. S. P. drugs is not true. But the main
objection to the preparation is its unscientific character and the
unwarranted therapeutic claims made for it.
Even though a patient had all three diseases, syphilis, tuberculosis
and anemia, it would be most irrational to use a shotgun prescription,
containing, in fixed unvarying proportions, mercury for the syphilis,
iron for the anemia and germicides for the tuberculosis. In syphilis
the mercury-content of Bannerman’s Solution is inadequate; in anemia
the intravenous administration of iron is unwarranted, and in
tuberculosis there is no evidence that the injection of bactericides is
efficient.
Exception must be taken, moreover, to the statement that “its use is
absolutely safe.” The danger of anaphylaxis from repeated injections
of albuminates cannot be disregarded, and as J. F. Anderson, director
of the Hygienic Laboratory, has pointed out[54] we know little of the
secondary or remote effects of the intravenous injection of toxic
substances; some of them probably do permanent harm.
[54] The Journal A. M. A., July 4, 1914, p. 1.
Such claims as the following require no comment:
“It builds up and increases the hemoglobin in the blood.
“It increases the number of red blood corpuscles.
“It regulates the white cells.
“It stimulates cell growth; therefore, it is reconstructive.
“It is a powerful antiseptic.
“It is useful in any septic condition.”
In view of the facts given, the Council again refused recognition to
Bannerman’s Intravenous Solution.--(_From The Journal A. M. A., Jan. 2,
1915._)
IODALIA[O]
Abstract of Report of the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry
[O] For the unabridged report of the Council’s action on Iodalia, see
Reports Council Pharm. and Chem., 1914, p. 69.
Iodalia is sold by Geo. J. Wallau, Inc., with the claim that because of
the peculiar combination in which it contains iodin it is a valuable
and efficient substitute for iodids. The preparation was examined in
the Chemical Laboratory of the American Medical Association, which
reported to the Council that, contrary to claim, iodin in the form
present in Iodalia would, when administered, act like an ordinary
iodid. Further the proportion of iodin present was so small that to
administer the equivalent of 20 grains of potassium iodid it would
be necessary to give the contents of a one-dollar bottle of Iodalia.
In view of this report it is evident that the claim that Iodalia
is “always well tolerated” and that it cannot produce “symptoms of
iodism” is true only because of the small percentage of iodin it
contains. The claims made in the advertising matter, that Iodalia is
an efficient iodin medication in the treatment of syphilis, that it
is a suitable substitute for cod-liver oil and that it may be used in
anemia, dysmenorrhea, dyspepsia, malaria and diseases of the heart, are
entirely unwarranted.
Iodalia is exploited in a way to suggest its use to the public for a
host of diseases. Particularly reprehensible are the recommendations
contained in a circular which accompanies the trade package that
Iodalia:
“... offers the same protection against grippe, bronchitis,
pneumonia, tuberculosis, pleurisy and other infectious diseases
that vaccine does against small pox ...”
“It is also the best preventive against the slight infections and
ailments to which debilitated and delicate children are subject.”
The Council voted that Iodalia be refused recognition.--(_From The
Journal A. M. A., Dec. 12, 1914._)
IODEX
Report of the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry
Iodex is manufactured by Menley and James, Ltd., New York. It is
advertised as
“... an embodiment of vaporized iodin in an organic base, reduced
and standardized at 5 per cent. by incorporation with a refined
petroleum product.”
The advertising conveys the impression that the effects of free iodin
are to be obtained from the preparation; it is said to contain “5 per
cent. Therapeutically Free Iodine,” and to do
“... everything the doctor expects of FREE iodin employed by
inunction, without one physical or therapeutic drawback.”
The statements are also made that the preparation “neither stains,
irritates, blisters or cracks the skin,” and that “thirty minutes after
inunction iodin can be found in the urine.”
The following report of an examination made by the Chemical Laboratory
of the American Medical Association has been submitted to the Council:
“Iodex is dark green, practically black. The green color is apparent
when the ointment is rubbed on the skin, but disappears on continued
rubbing. This nonstaining property is explained by the results of a
test for free iodin, made on five specimens, four of which yielded
only minute traces of free iodin, while the fifth yielded none.
Of course, the statements that Iodex is an ‘Effective Free Iodin
Application Without Drawbacks’ and also a means of ‘Really Efficient
External Iodine Therapy Without Stain or Irritation’ contradict each
other. Free iodin cannot be present in a sufficient quantity to be
therapeutically efficient in any application which does not stain or
irritate the skin.
“The total iodin content of the five specimens was found to be 2.63
per cent.--a little over one-half of the content claimed.
“Absorption and excretion experiments were performed to test the
claim that ‘thirty minutes after inunction iodin can be found in the
urine.’ In several subjects, from 1 to 2 gm. of Iodex was rubbed on
the skin of the forearms, and the urine, for periods varying from
seven to seventy-two hours, was collected and tested for iodin. In
all of the tests the results were negative.”
Iodex is advertised as beneficial in muscular soreness, sprains,
sciatica, neuritis, chronic rheumatism, enlarged glands, orchitis,
epididymitis, gout, burns and dermatomycoses. It is also said to be
“Indicated in Glandular Enlargements, Inflammatory Conditions, Various
Joint Diseases, Rheumatism, Skin Diseases, Chilblains, etc., etc.”
To sum up:
1. As shown in the foregoing laboratory report, the composition is
incorrectly stated, for the actual iodin content is only about half of
that claimed.
2. It is not true that the action of Iodex is essentially that of free
iodin, which is the impression conveyed by the advertising.
3. The assertion made in the advertising, that iodin may be found in
the urine shortly after Iodex has been rubbed on the skin, has been
experimentally disproved.
In view of these findings, the Council voted that Iodex be refused
recognition for conflict with Rules 1, 4 and 6.--(_From The Journal
A. M. A., June 19, 1915._)
IODIA
Report of the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry
The following report on Iodia was adopted by the Council and its
publication authorized.
W. A. Puckner, Secretary.
Iodia is put on the market by Battle and Company, under the claim
that it contains potassium iodid in combination with iron phosphate
and vegetable “principles.” It is extravagantly recommended for use
in many and varied conditions. For instance, it is “an unexcelled
altero-reconstructive,” “almost a specific” in eczema and rheumatism
and “a highly efficient form of iodin,” which will not produce iodism!
The therapeutic effects of iodids result from a chemical transformation
by which molecular iodin is set free in the tissues, thus producing
a mild degree of iodism. It follows, then, that a preparation which
cannot give rise to the symptoms of iodism cannot be expected to
produce the therapeutic effects of the iodids. The claim that Iodia is
therapeutically efficient without producing iodism therefore justifies
suspicion, to put it mildly.
In view of the exaggerated tone of the advertising, together with the
fact that a report from the Chemical Laboratory of the American Medical
Association showed marked discrepancies between the formula and the
composition of Iodia, it seemed desirable to investigate this product.
The report of the laboratory, which is given below, shows conflict
with Rule 1 (secrecy of composition) and with Rule 2 (false claims of
standardization). A discussion of the claims made for Iodia follows the
report.
LABORATORY REPORT
The composition of Iodia is given thus:
“Formula.--Iodia is a combination of active principles obtained
from the green roots of Stillingia, Helonias, Saxifraga,
Menispermum and aromatics. Each fluid drachm also contains two and
one-half grains Iod.-Potas. and one and one-half grains Phos.-Iron.”
We are told that:
“Its several ingredients are selected with scrupulous care, and the
most exacting methods are constantly employed to insure absolute
uniformity and maximum therapeutic potency.”
This “formula” is an absurdity: First, the amounts of the “active
principles” of the plants named are not given; second, these
“principles,” with the possible exception of menispermum alkaloids,
have not been isolated; and, third, ferric phosphate and potassium
iodid are incompatible! Incidentally, there are no methods whereby it
is possible to secure “absolute uniformity” of a mixture such as Iodia
is claimed to be.
Qualitative tests demonstrated the absence of iron and the absence
of all but traces of phosphorus compounds (0.015 gm. phosphorus per
100 c.c.). Minute traces of alkaloids, possibly from menispermum,
were found (that amount being about 0.004 gm. per hundred c.c. of the
preparation). Therapeutically this quantity is entirely negligible.
Determinations of iodid demonstrated the presence of only about 60 per
cent. of the amount of potassium iodid claimed. The “formula” for Iodia
is false and misleading.[55]
[55] It should be noted that the discrepancies here reported between
the actual and the claimed composition of Iodia were pointed out more
than thirty years ago by A. B. Lyons (Detroit _Lancet_, October, 1882,
vi, 157–8), who found that Iodia was deficient in iodid content and
practically free from iron.
DANGEROUS RECOMMENDATIONS
One of the Iodia labels reads:
“INDICATIONS.--Syphilitic, scrofulous and cutaneous diseases,
dysmenorrhea, menorrhagia, leucorrhea, amenorrhea, impaired
vitality, habitual abortion and general uterine debility.”
Such recommendations are likely to lead to self-drugging in conditions
that are not only dangerous to the individual but also a menace to the
community. The preparation thus conflicts with Rule 4 of the Council.
After admitting the need of efficient iodid medication in certain
stages of syphilis and after exaggerating the frequence and severity
of symptoms of iodism, an advertising circular entitled “Practical
Therapeutics” asserts:
“Iodia then is the preparation of iodid of potassium to be
preferred whenever it requires to be administered in large doses or
for prolonged periods of time...
“Not only does the association of the iodid of potassium with the
vegetable alteratives offer a measure of protection against iodism
but the latter exert depurative effects on their own account ...”
It is generally accepted that in certain stages of syphilis the only
hope of success lies in efficient iodin medication. The exploiters
of Iodia state that a dose of the nostrum contains 2-1/2 grains of
potassium iodid; actually it contains only 1-1/2 grains. To urge
physicians and the public to depend on this product for efficient iodid
medication constitutes an unwarranted therapeutic exaggeration (Rule 6)
which approaches criminality. The reason Iodia does not produce iodism
is that, in the doses recommended, the iodin action is extremely feeble.
Likening the human body to a factory and discussing the “break downs”
which are likely to occur, a circular entitled “Always Trustworthy”
says:
“When administered in proper dosage, Iodia stimulates organic
functions, promotes the elimination of waste products, and
re-establishes metabolic activity. It increases the solvent
properties of the blood, and arrests abnormal tissue metamorphosis.
In other words, it lends material assistance to weakened
cells and curbs those unduly active. Iodia, obviously, has
a wide range of indications. It has been most generally and
successfully employed, however, in Syphilitic, Scrofulous and
Cutaneous Diseases, Rheumatic and Gouty Ailments, Dysmenorrhea,
Menorrhagia, Leucorrhea, Amenorrhea, Impaired Vitality, Habitual
Abortion and General Uterine Debility, and wherever a reliable
altero-reconstructive is required.”
These recommendations show that in addition to the objections already
given, this nostrum is an unscientific shot-gun mixture. This brings it
in conflict with Rule 10 (unscientific articles inimical to the medical
profession and the public).
It is recommended that Iodia be refused recognition.--(_From The
Journal A. M. A., Nov. 21, 1914._)
BURNHAM’S SOLUBLE IODINE[P]
Report of the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry
[P] See also Burnham’s Soluble Iodine, p. 233.
The Council has authorized publication of the following report on
Burnham’s Soluble Iodine.
W. A. Puckner, Secretary.
Burnham’s Soluble Iodine is offered to the medical profession by the
Burnham Soluble Iodine Company, Auburndale, Mass., under the claim that
by
“... a new process hitherto unknown to chemistry, ... Iodine is
converted into a soluble article--soluble in water and soluble in
gastric secretions and in the tissues.”
Beyond this no statement as to the qualitative or quantitative chemical
identity of Burnham’s Soluble Iodine is furnished; this secrecy, of
course, has given the preparation a certain mysterious prestige among
unthinking physicians.
Burnham’s Soluble Iodine was examined in the Chemical Laboratory of the
American Medical Association some six years ago and was found to be an
alcoholic solution of free iodin (approximately 3 gm. per hundred c.c.)
and combined iodin in the form of iodid (equivalent to about 2 gm. of
potassium iodid per hundred c.c.). Thus the total iodin content was
somewhat less than half of that of the official Tincture of Iodin (Tr.
Iodi), which contains 7 gm. of free iodin and 5 gm. of potassium iodid
to each 100 c.c. The official tincture, diluted one-half, therefore,
would be essentially equivalent to the Burnham preparation, both being
miscible with water. The Burnham Soluble Iodine Company objected to the
conclusions drawn, from this analysis, but admitted the correctness of
the analysis itself.
Any one who gathered his first knowledge of the subject from the
Burnham advertising might readily infer that no soluble iodin had been
known prior to Burnham’s Soluble Iodine. This, of course, is not the
case; the method of producing a solution of iodin by the use of an
iodid has long been known.
The following statement is not only obviously untrue but also
nonsensical:
“In all the history of iodin medication, covering a period of
laboratory research of many years duration, every effort to produce
a free iodin, _prior_ to the evolution of Burnham’s Soluble Iodine,
was attended by failure.”
The company lays stress on the assumed superiority over the iodids
of a preparation containing free iodin. This assumption is based
on a fallacy. Those who regard free iodin as superior to combined
iodin forget that free iodin taken by the mouth is converted in the
intestines, by the action of the alkaline intestinal secretions,
into an iodid with a small amount of iodate, while administered
intravenously (a procedure that, while advocated by the Burnham
concern, is therapeutically indefensible), it enters into combination
with the alkaline salts and proteins of the blood. The free iodin in
Burnham’s Soluble Iodine must act in the system as an iodid, and the
whole iodin content, to furnish a correct estimate of the value of the
preparation, should be reckoned as an iodid.
Bearing this in mind, then, it is evident that the doses of Burnham’s
Soluble Iodine recommended by the manufacturers are extremely small.
They range from 20 minims (equivalent to 1 grain of potassium iodid)
to 1/2 minim (equivalent to 1/40 grain of potassium iodid). From 5 to
20 minims (equivalent to about 1/4 to 1 grain of potassium iodid) is
the dosage recommended for syphilis; from “1 to 3 minims [equivalent to
from 1/20 to 3/20 grain of potassium iodid] three to six times daily”
for typhoid and other intestinal diseases. No wonder the exploiters
can say that this nostrum does not irritate the intestines, that it is
“non-irritating to the weakest stomach” and that there is an “entire
absence of toxic action from maximum doses”! Its alleged freedom from
the irritating and untoward effects of ordinary iodids is due, not to
any inherent superiority of the preparation, but to the insignificant
amount of iodid present.
The preparation is advertised for use in an extremely wide range of
diseases, in some of which iodid therapy is recognized as of value,
while in others it is generally regarded as either worthless or
harmful. Given orally or intravenously (the recklessness of the latter
method should again be emphasized) Burnham’s Soluble Iodine is claimed
to be of:
“... great utility as an internal antiseptic in tubercular
affections ...”
Since, as previously explained, free iodin, when introduced into the
body, enters into chemical combination before it has a chance to
permeate the tissues, and since the alkali iodids possess very slight
(in fact, for this purpose, negligible) antiseptic powers, it is
evident that this claim is unfounded. So, for the same reason, is the
claim that “as an intestinal antiseptic,” Burnham’s Soluble Iodine is:
“... efficient in Typhoid Fever, Enteritis and other intestinal
diseases.”
It is recommended in exophthalmic goiter, notwithstanding that
this condition is generally recognized as contraindicating the
administration of iodids, which excite the action of the thyroid
gland, and which therefore must be used with great circumspection.
An especially indefensible recommendation is that 1/2 minim of
Burnham’s Soluble Iodine (equivalent to 1/40 grain of potassium
iodid) be administered every five minutes in “membranous
croup”--diphtheria--until relief from dyspnea is obtained. But, of all
the extravagant claims made for this preparation, perhaps the following
is the most reprehensible:
“In the treatment of Phthisis, in its various forms, clinical
evidence clearly indicates that the use of SOLUBLE IODINE affords
the most potent method of treatment available. Dose--2 minims,
increasing to 5 minims in four ounces water before meals.”
Remove the mystery and tell physicians that a dose of 1/10 or 1/4 of
a grain of potassium iodid is “the most potent method of treatment
available” in tuberculosis and the absurdity becomes self-evident.
Nor is this the worst feature of the advice here offered. Iodin, by
combining with the fatty acids of tuberculous tissues, promotes their
autolysis and consequently their softening and breaking down. The
products of this autolysis are carried by the lymphatics to healthy
tissues and thus may spread the infection. Therefore the use of iodids
in tuberculosis, even in small dosage, should not be undertaken
lightly.
It is recommended that Burnham’s Soluble Iodine, a semi-secret
preparation, exploited by means of extravagant and dangerous
therapeutic claims, be held ineligible for admission to New and
Nonofficial Remedies, and that this report be published.--(_From The
Journal A. M. A., May 15, 1915._)
IODOTONE[Q]
Abstract of Report of the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry
[Q] For the unabridged report of the Council’s action on Iodotone, see
Reports Council Pharm. and Chem., 1914, p. 72.
Eimer and Amend, New York, who market Iodotone, state that it is a
solution of hydrogen iodid (hydriodic acid) in glycerin, containing 1
grain of iodin to each fluid dram. The unwarranted assertion is made
that Iodotone
“... will produce the constitutional effect of iodine in a shorter
time than other preparations ...”
This cannot be true, for it is certain that, because of the alkaline
reactions of the tissues, iodids, whether administered as hydrogen
iodid or as alkali iodids, must circulate in precisely the same form
and therefore exert the same therapeutic effects in precisely the same
way.
Eimer and Amend further assert that the ordinary iodids may to
advantage be replaced by Iodotone. The absurdity of this claim is
apparent when it is considered that it will be necessary to administer
nearly one fluidounce of glycerin to obtain an amount of Iodotone
equivalent to a 10-grain dose of potassium iodid. The additional
claim that Iodotone will not disturb the stomach or produce the usual
disagreeable symptoms of iodism is evidently unwarranted, for it is
generally conceded that symptoms of iodism can be avoided only at the
risk of insufficient iodin medication. Because of these unwarranted and
misleading claims and because the name Iodotone would tend toward the
uncritical use of the preparation as a general tonic, the Council voted
that Iodotone be refused recognition.--(_From The Journal A. M. A.,
Dec. 12, 1914._)
IOSALINE
Report of the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry
Iosaline is a rheumatism remedy for external application. In view
of the misleading and unwarranted claims which are made for it, the
Council voted that Iosaline be refused recognition and recommended
publication of the Committee’s report which appears below.
W. A. Puckner, Secretary.
COMMITTEE’S REPORT
The following sweeping but rather indefinite claims are made for
Iosaline.
“Iosaline is a penetrator and overcomes the objectionable
escharotic properties of Iodine; it is readily absorbed and may be
used without discomfort or discoloration.”
“The strong analgesic properties of Iosaline make it especially
useful in controlling pain in cases of Neuralgia, Rheumatism, Gout,
and Arthritis Deformans.”
As there are few, if any, known iodin compounds which are “readily
absorbed” through the skin and which will not at the same time produce
discoloration or discomfort, it was thought worth while to take up the
examination of Iosaline. The results of this examination are reported
by the Chemical Laboratory of the Association as follows:
_Laboratory Report_:--Iosaline is advertised by the Iosaline Company
of New York, as a remedy for the treatment by external application,
of rheumatism, gout, neuralgia, pneumonia and numerous other
diseases. Concerning its composition the following statements are
made:
“A transparent, non-staining gelatinoid of combined iodine with
menthol and methyl salicylate.
“Alcohol 070. per cent.
“Chemical tests demonstrate the preparation to contain 5 per cent.
of iodine.”
The placing of a cipher before the percentage figure for alcohol,
though perhaps accidental and not meant to mislead, might cause a
hasty or careless reader to understand 7 per cent. or .07 per cent.,
instead of 70 per cent., as the proportion of alcohol present.
The preparation examined was a very pale yellowish, translucent solid
having a strong odor of methyl salicylate and a fainter odor of
menthol. A package sold for 2 ounces contained 51.7 gm. Qualitative
tests indicated the presence of alcohol, an iodid, menthol, methyl
salicylate, potassium, sodium, combined fatty acids and a trace of
glycerin. Thyroid extract was not found. Quantitative examination
indicated the following approximate composition for Iosaline:
Alcohol (by weight) 48.05 per cent.
Menthol 2.07 per cent.
Methyl salicylate 10.25 per cent.
Potassium iodid (4.25 per cent. iodin) 5.55 per cent.
Soap 12.68 per cent.
Glycerin a trace
Water and undetermined matter to make 100 per cent.
Iosaline, therefore, appears to be a solidified, watery-alcoholic
solution of soap containing potassium iodid, menthol and methyl
salicylate. Physiologic tests carried out by rubbing the preparation on
the skin and afterward testing the saliva and the urine for an iodid
indicated that none of the potassium iodid is absorbed. Since Iosaline
is claimed to contain 70 per cent. of alcohol and 5 per cent. of iodin,
the alcohol content is but 68.7 per cent. and the iodin content but
85 per cent. of the amounts claimed. The phrase “combined iodin” is
evidently meant to mislead, and adds the element of mystery on which
preparations of this class rely so largely.--(_From The Journal
A. M. A., March 15, 1913._)
NOURRY WINE[R][S]
Abstract of Report of the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry
[R] For the unabridged report of the Council’s action on Nourry Wine,
see Reports Council Pharm. and Chem., 1914, p. 74.
[S] For reports and articles on other acetanilid mixtures, see pp. 9,
244, 268, 305.
Nourry Wine (E. Fougera and Co., New York) is a proprietary iodin
preparation said to contain 12 per cent. of alcohol and 1-1/2 grains of
iodin in combination with tannin to the fluidounce. Experiments made in
the A. M. A. Chemical Laboratory demonstrate that the iodin contained
in Nourry Wine is present either in the form of iodid ions or in a form
very readily yielding iodid ions and that therefore its action will be
that of ordinary iodid. Yet a circular asserts:
“The Nourry Wine is the one preparation ... able to introduce into
the organism the active metalloid liberated little by little from
the organic combination....”
While Nourry Wine contains but an insignificant proportion of iodin,
the circular claims that “Nourry Wine presents a high dose of iodin.”
Further, the label on Nourry Wine and the circular which is wrapped
with it suggests its use in a number of diseases in which iodin
medication is considered of minor importance. These recommendations,
bolstered up by testimonials from twelve to twenty-five years old,
are likely to lead the public if not the medical profession to use
this weak iodid wine where efficient treatment is called for. The
attempt is made to give a further false value to Nourry Wine in the
minds of those who prize everything that is foreign by the suggestion
that it comes from France when in reality it is made in New York. In
conclusion the Council held that, though the alcohol of the wine is the
most potent constituent, the constant use in the advertising matter
of the term “Nourry Wine,” unqualified by the adjective “Iodinated,”
was mischievous as likely to lead to the thoughtless use of the
preparation in cases unsuitable for iodin medication. The Council
refused recognition to Nourry Wine.--(_From The Journal A. M. A., Dec.
12, 1914._)
LABORDINE
A Report by the Council and Some Pertinent Comments Added Thereto
The following report was submitted to the Council on Pharmacy and
Chemistry by the subcommittee which examined Labordine:
_To the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry_:--Your subcommittee
presents the following report on Labordine, sold by the Labordine
Pharmacal Co., St. Louis.
Labordine is advertised to physicians as having the following
composition:
Apium Graveolens
(true active principle) “Process-Laborde” 35-3/8
Gaultheria Fragrantissima
(true active principle) “Process-Laborde” 25-1/8
Acete Amide-Phenyle 15-1/8
Quinina 1-1/8
Benzoyl-Sulphyonic-Imide 23-1/4
It is stated to be a “vegetable antipyretic”; that {“}it reduces
temperature without heart depression,” and physicians are warned
to “avoid acetanilid poisoning and danger from other coal-tar
antipyretics.”
[Illustration]
While the “formula” and the statement just quoted are sufficient
evidence of the fraudulent character of the product, yet an abstract
of the reports of the chemists who analyzed it is given further to
demonstrate its character.
Taking the average of the reports of analyses, labordine contains:
Acetanilid 37.9
Free salicylic acid 6.9
Quinin present
Corn starch present
Milk sugar 34.7
This report of analysis only makes apparent that Labordine is not
what it is claimed to be. While it is claimed to contain 23-1/4 per
cent. saccharin, this substance was not present, or mere traces only.
While, in a disguised way, it is stated to contain 15-1/8 per cent.
acetanilid, it contained nearly 40 per cent.
It is recommended that Labordine be not approved and that this report
be published.
The recommendation of the subcommittee was adopted by the Council, and
in accordance therewith the above report is published.
W. A. Puckner, Secretary.
COMMENTS
A concrete illustration of some general principles previously laid down
is furnished by a nostrum too unimportant to be of any value, save to
“point a moral and adorn a tale.”
About thirteen years ago Labordine was advertised under the name of
Analgine-Labordine, “A purely vegetable product,” “a combination of the
active principles of _Camellia Thea_, _Apium Graveolens_, saccharin
and carbohydrates,” “Superior to Antipyrine, Phenacetine, Antifebrine,
Acetanilid”--note the use of two names for the same thing--“or any of
their imitations,” and “unexcelled by any coal-tar product or their
compounds.” In 1894 the name was changed to Labordine, in order, as its
owner stated, to prevent its being mistaken for a coal-tar product of
similar name.
What its composition was at this time we do not know, since there
is no guarantee of the permanence nor stability of nostrum formulas
except “the honor and reputation of the manufacturers,” which, as
investigation has shown, is not always unimpeachable. There has been
nothing to prevent alteration of the formula, if the proprietors
desired, with every change in the moon. But the name and the general
tone of the advertising has been the same. The claim of superiority
over coal-tar products has been constantly made.
As to the present conditions, a circular enclosed with a sample of
Labordine, recently sent from the St. Louis office, contains the
formula given above in the report of the Council. In the same circular
are also found these illuminating statements: “The medical profession
has long appreciated the dangers involved in the administration of
various mineral remedies now so commonly employed, and the value of
a safe, effective and reliable vegetable antipyretic is universally
recognized. Such a remedy is Labordine. It is purely vegetable in
its composition and produces none of the evil after-effects of the
coal-tar derivatives.... Labordine ... is a purely vegetable cardiac
stimulant.... There is nothing mysterious about Labordine or its
constituents.... The ‘Process-Laborde’ gives the true active principles
of the Celery and Indian Wintergreen, something heretofore difficult
to obtain. To this is added the fact that absolutely chemically pure
Acet-Amide-Phenyle is used. The latter is the most valuable and, in
fact, the only vegetable antipyretic known.”
The above report of the Council shows the following facts:
1. _Apium Graveolens_ (true active principle), “Process-Laborde” is
probably powdered celery seed. One chemist says: “The powder has the
characteristic odor of celery, while a microscopic examination shows
the presence of a substance having the characteristic structure of
seeds in general.” If celery seed has any “active principle” it has
never been isolated. As to its therapeutic value, nothing whatever is
known. It is, we understand, highly beneficial in the case of singing
canaries, but authorities in scientific therapeutics have never
discovered that it possessed any remarkable medicinal qualities.
2. _Gaultheria Fragrantissima_ (true active principle),
“Process-Laborde,” is probably ordinary everyday salicylic acid. One
analysis showed salicylic acid to be present to the amount of about
7 per cent. The question of whether or not salicylic acid could in
any way be considered the “true active principle” of _Gaultheria
Fragrantissima_, was submitted to Prof. John Uri Lloyd of Cincinnati,
the eminent authority on the chemistry of the proximate principles of
plants, who replies:
“The advertisement is evidently so worded that, although the name of
the Indian plant _Gaultheria Fragrantissima_ is employed, its true and
active principle being wintergreen oil, the concoctor can mystify his
patrons and at the same time use the well-known wintergreen oil, made
in America, which in my opinion, so far as any chemical test might
be concerned, could not be distinguished from the methyl salicylic
acid (wintergreen oil) derived from the Indian plant. Concerning
whether salicylic acid is a proximate constituent of _Gaultheria
Fragrantissima_, in my opinion, it would be a misnomer to make such an
announcement. Salicylic acid, per se, does not exist, in my opinion, in
the plants mentioned, being made by chemistry.”
3. The third and most important ingredient in this “purely vegetable
antipyretic” is brazenly announced as “Acet-Amide-Phenyle,” but it is
only necessary to say that this imposing designation is an attempt to
“Frenchify” a scientific name for acetanilid.
Analysis shows that this coal-tar product is present to the amount
of 37.9 per cent., or 1.89 grains in a 5-grain tablet.[56] In other
words, this imposing Labordine, made by a mysterious and elsewhere
unheard of “Process-Laborde,” is simply one more of the many acetanilid
powders that have been foisted on our profession and that have filled
our journals for years past. The only thing in it that is of practical
therapeutic value is 2 grains of acetanilid to a 5-grain tablet. The
statement that Labordine is a purely vegetable preparation is probably
intended by the proprietors as a good joke on the medical profession.
Acetanilid is not usually regarded as a vegetable product, at least it
is not ordinarily found in market gardens. The only vegetable source
from which acetanilid can be obtained is the beautiful flowering
coal-tar bush, from which so many other nostrum vendors obtain their
“perfectly harmless, purely vegetable antipyretics,” all composed of
acetanilid and something to hide it. If the statements made by one
of the company’s employees and quoted below are true, Labordine is
not “manufactured and made chemically pure in the laboratories of the
Labordine Pharmacal Company,” for this company has no laboratory, and
its product is manufactured for it.
[56] Since this article was prepared we find that the national Food and
Drugs Act has forced the proprietors of Labordine to put on the label
the amount of acetanilid it contains, viz., 40 per cent., or 2 grains
in a 5 grain tablet.
4. Our readers will be interested to know that the important ingredient
entered under the imposing name of Benzoyl-Sulphyonic-Imide is simply
a highly scientific name for saccharin. Even on this point, however,
the formula is misleading, since it claims 23-1/4 per cent. of this
substance, whereas the analysis shows that the presence of saccharin
could not be proved. If it is present at all it is in quantities much
less than stated, and so small as to be difficult of recognition.
Instead it appears that the product contains common starch and about 35
per cent. of milk sugar.
THE COMPANY ITSELF
One of the humiliating phases of the proprietary medicine business
is that, in many instances, these preparations are foisted on our
profession by men who know nothing of medicine, pharmacy or chemistry,
yet who not only presume to concoct our medicines for us, but also
assume to instruct us how to use them.
Gould’s Commercial Register for 1907 gives the officers of the
Labordine Pharmacal Company as H. M. Coudrey, president; M. Crawley,
vice-president, and D. E. Gamble, Jr., secretary and treasurer. The
place of business is given as 420 Market street, St. Louis. We are
informed that Harry M. Coudrey is an insurance agent and the present
member of Congress from the Twelfth Missouri District; that Mark
Crawley is a clerk in the insurance office of H. M. Coudrey; and
that Mr. Gamble is cashier in the same office. A recent visit of a
representative of The Journal to 420 Market street, St. Louis, showed
that the office of the Labordine Pharmacal Company is in Room 12 on
the third floor of an old dilapidated building. There was no sign
on the door of the office, but on the wall next to an old elevator
was a very small sign which read “Labordine Chemical Company, Room
12.” The office at the time of the visit was apparently in charge of
a young woman about 20 years old. Careful scrutiny of the furniture
and fixtures showed that the room contained an old oak roll-top desk
in one corner and a kitchen table, on which were piled about half a
dozen packages of Labordine. The floor of the room was bare and very
dirty. In an adjoining room, the door of which was open, was piled a
lot of broken furniture. No laboratories nor chemical apparatus were
visible. The young woman in charge stated that Labordine was made by
the Mallinckrodt Chemical Works, at No. 3600 North Second Street, St.
Louis.
This is a fair sample of nostrums and of the methods of exploiting
them. The bitterly humiliating fact about the whole business is that
a preparation, advertised under such palpably misleading claims,
could actually be advertised in medical journals, even in journals
of a supposedly high scientific standard, and could be bought and
prescribed for years by supposedly intelligent and conscientious
physicians. It is not supposed that every physician should be enough
of a chemist to detect the ridiculous discrepancies between the
published formula and the therapeutic claims made for such a mixture.
But that members of a supposedly learned profession should fail to
have enough interest in the preparations they prescribe for their
confiding patients to find out that acetanilid is being masked under
an obsolete and little used name, that under an imposing polysyllabic
designation is hidden saccharin, that the so-called “active principle
Process-Laborde” (whatever that may be), is equivalent only to
one-third grain of salicylic acid in a 5-grain tablet, and that the
advertising matter sent out for years by this company contained
absolute falsehoods regarding the composition and therapeutic benefits
of its preparation, is certainly just cause for shame and humiliation.
If a physician, knowing the composition of Labordine, wishes to
prescribe it and prescribes it intelligently, he has a perfect right
to do so. If he wishes his patient to have 2 grains of acetanilid,
1/20 of a grain of quinin, and 1/3 of a grain of salicylic acid, and
considers a mixture of ground celery seed, starch and milk sugar as a
proper vehicle for this medication, no one will question his right to
administer it. No physician, however, has any right, either moral or
professional, to prescribe a preparation, concerning the ingredients of
which he knows absolutely nothing.
Is it possible that such carelessness may be one of the causes of
waning public confidence in our profession? We leave it to our readers
to determine whether such a moral can be drawn from this typical
nostrum story.--(_From The Journal A. M. A., March 30, 1907._)
LACTOBACILLINE OMITTED FROM N. N. R.
Report of the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry
The Franco-American Ferment Company has advised the Council on
Pharmacy and Chemistry that, in advertising its products, it will
no longer conform to the rules of the Council. This is evident. The
Franco-American Ferment Company has distributed circulars in which the
public is informed that auto-intoxication is the cause of innumerable
ills ranging all the way from arteriosclerosis, rheumatism and gout
to chronic headache, odorous perspiration, nervous disorders and
melancholia; that the Bulgarian bacillus “is a wonderful corrective
or remedy” for all these conditions, and that the Lactobacilline
products are the only preparations of Bulgarian bacillus “to be
had in America which bear his [Professor Metchnikoff’s] personal
endorsement”--by inference, the only reliable products. In view of the
action of the Franco-American Ferment Company, and of the tendency of
their advertising to cause the public to exaggerate slight ailments
into alarming conditions, the Council has voted that the several
Lactobacilline products of this concern be deleted from New and
Nonofficial Remedies.--(_From The Journal A. M. A., April 17, 1915._)
REEXAMINATION OF LACTOPEPTINE[T]
Report to the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry
[T] See also Liquid Combinations Containing Pepsin and Pancreatin,
p. 157. A reprint of articles bearing on this subject, issued under the
title Digestive Impossibilities, will be sent on receipt of a 2-cent
stamp.
In 1907 the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry published a report on
Lactopeptine. At that time it was shown that Lactopeptine did not have
the composition claimed for it. The same claims as to composition
are still being made for the product. In view of this fact, a second
examination of Lactopeptine has been made and the result reported to
the committee on chemistry. The report confirms the Council’s findings
of six years ago. After adoption by the committee, it was adopted by
the Council and its publication authorized.
W. A. Puckner, Secretary.
SECOND EXAMINATION OF LACTOPEPTINE
Two specimens of Lactopeptine in original unbroken packages were
recently examined. One of these was an American preparation said to be
produced by the New York Pharmaceutical Association at Yonkers and the
other an English preparation from John Morgan Richards and Sons, London.
When Lactopeptine was first examined by the Council about six years
ago, it was found to be little more than weak saccharated pepsin,
and did not contain the other ferments which were claimed by the
manufacturers to be present. A statement concerning this was published
in the Council Reports for 1905-1908, p. 43. Because of claims recently
made by the exploiters that this preparation contains not only pepsin
but also pancreatin, diastase, lactic acid and hydrochloric acid, and
that the failure to recognize these must be due to the lack of ability
of the chemists making the examination, it seemed worth while to
undertake a new series of tests on samples from two sources mentioned,
the products on the British and American markets. The label on the
British sample gives the following as the composition:
Sugar of Milk 40 ounces
Pepsin 8 ounces
Pancreatine 6 ounces
Ptyalin or Diastase 4 drachms
Lactic Acid 5 fl. drachms
Hydrochloric Acid 5 fl. drachms
The label on the American sample gives no quantities but states that it
“represents a combination of the principal digestive and enzymogenic
agents, Pepsin, Pancreatin, Diastase, Lactic and Hydrochloric Acids, in
the proper proportion to insure best results.”
We have examined both preparations for starch-digesting power according
to the methods employed in our previous examinations of such ferments
and already reported. Diastase and the amylopsin of pancreatin seem
to be completely absent, or, if present at all, in such minute traces
that digestion of starch is not shown after one hour when quantities
running from 60 mg. up to 150 mg. were allowed to act on 500 mg. of
starch made up into paste. These tests were repeated, always with the
same results, and were controlled by digestions of the same starch with
other diastase preparations of known value.
Tryptic activity appears likewise to be absent, as in weak alkaline
solution after fifteen hours’ digestion no effect on coagulated egg
albumin or fibrin was observed when 100 mg. of each preparation was
used with 1 gm. of the protein material.
As was found in the previous investigation the two products have some
peptic activity, but this activity is comparatively weak, as about
200 mg. of each preparation are required to digest 10 gm. of coagulated
egg albumin with 0.2 per cent. hydrochloric acid in three hours at
40 C. (104 F.), and 100 mg. portions were unable to completely digest
10 gm. portions of egg albumin with acid of the same strength in four
hours at 50 C. (122 F.).
Hydrochloric acid is absent, as might be expected from the character
of the preparation, and the amount of combined chlorid is small; but
qualitative tests were obtained for organic acid resembling in behavior
lactic acid, which is probably present in combined form.
It must be reaffirmed then that in digestive activity both the
Lactopeptine purchased in the United States and that bought in England
are essentially weak saccharated pepsins.
[Editorial Note.--The report of 1907 demonstrated that Lactopeptine
was at that time a weak saccharated pepsin. The present report shows
that Lactopeptine, as it is sold both in the United States and Great
Britain, is still the same weak pepsin preparation. By the false
statements which appear on the Lactopeptine labels the exploiters lay
themselves liable to prosecution under the Food and Drugs Act--just as
they have laid themselves liable for the past six years. The continued
exploitation of this preparation warrants a restatement of facts that
have been given many times before:
1. A preparation having the composition claimed for Lactopeptine--a
powder containing pepsin, pancreatin, diastase, lactic acid and
hydrochloric acid--cannot be produced commercially.
2. Even if such a combination were available, the acidity of the
mixture itself and of the gastric juice would in all probability
destroy the pancreatin before it could reach the intestinal tract.
3. Even if every constituent could exert its proper function at the
right time, the administration of such a shotgun mixture would be
unscientific and uncalled for.]--(_From The Journal A. M. A., Aug. 2,
1913._)
MEAT AND BEEF JUICES[U]
Report of the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry
[U] See also following report on Valentine’s Meat Juice and article on
Meat Extracts and Meat Juices, p. 470.
The following was submitted to the Council by a subcommittee:
_To the Council_:--While meat extracts contain only traces of
coagulable proteids and have little food value, meat juices are
prepared by a process which ensures the presence in the finished
product of considerable quantities of coagulable proteids and they
therefore have considerable value as foods. Many preparations which
are sold as beef juices or meat juices have no right to these
designations. Since the public and physicians are likely to be misled
by the names given to these products and by the false claims which
are made for them as foods and depend on them in the nourishment of
the sick, it is important that their composition and their value as
foods should be known.
In the following report is presented the results of an examination
of some of the commercial products found on the American market.
The report shows that _Wyeth’s Beef Juice_ (John Wyeth & Bro.,
Philadelphia), _Bovinine_ (The Bovinine Co., New York), _Carnine_
(Carnine Co., Fougera & Co., New York), and _Valentine’s Meat Juice_
(M. J. Valentine, Richmond, Va.) are sold under names which are
incorrect, that their composition is not correctly stated by the
manufacturers and that false and misleading statements are made in
regard to their value as food.
It is recommended that the products named be refused recognition for
conflict with Rules 1, 6 and 8. Since these preparations are typical
of many others on the market, and as their use is a menace to the
public health it is recommended that the report be published.
This report was adopted by the Council.
W. A. Puckner, Secretary.
Beef or meat juices are clearly to be distinguished from beef or
meat extracts. The word “juice” applies solely to the fluid portion
remaining in fresh meat after proper cooling and storing and may be
obtained by pressure or diffusion with or without a low degree of heat.
Under heavy pressure freshly chopped meat will yield from 25 per cent.
to 40 per cent. of a thick reddish juice and if the meat is previously
frozen or heated to 60 C., as much as 50 per cent. may be obtained.
This gives some idea as to the probable cost of preparing beef juice
at home. The chief characteristics of meat juice are the presence of
a considerable proportion of coagulable protein and a low content of
meat bases. That above represents the nature of these commodities as
usually understood by the medical profession, is clearly shown by this
quotation:[57]
[57] Brunton, Sir Lauder: “Disorders of Assimilation, Digestion, etc.,”
p. 183.
“One or two teaspoonfuls of this (meat juice) are added to a teacupful
of cold or warm water, which, however, must not be boiling, or
otherwise the albumin would be coagulated, but it may, however, be
sufficiently warm to drink comfortably.”
Beef juice is considered by some physicians of much dietetic service
and believed to represent liquid food in concentrated form. W. O.
Atwater,[58] relative to this product says:
“Beef juice obtained from the best steak which has been merely warmed
through over the coals and then entirely deprived of soluble substance
by a screw press, is undoubtedly the most concentrated of the liquid
foods.”
[58] Bull. No. 21, U. S. Dept. Agricult., Office of Experiment Stations.
The latter authority gives a number of analyses of beef juices prepared
under known conditions.
DEFINITION OF MEAT JUICE
Meat juice is defined by the standards committee of the Association
of Official Agricultural Chemists as the fluid portion of muscle
fiber obtained by pressure or otherwise, and may be concentrated by
evaporation at a temperature below the coagulating point of the soluble
protein. The solids contain not more than 15 per cent. of ash, not more
than 2.5 per cent. of sodium chlorid (calculated from the total chlorin
present), not more than 4 nor less than 2 per cent. of phosphoric
acid (P_{2}O_{5}), and not less than 12 per cent. of nitrogen. The
nitrogenous bodies contain not less than 35 per cent. of coagulable
proteins and not more than 40 per cent. of meat bases.
Meat juices of commerce are supposed to be made by subjecting properly
prepared meat to heavy pressure with subsequent concentration of the
juice _in vacuo_ at a low temperature. The latter is necessary because
if the temperature is raised to any material extent the valuable
coagulable, soluble proteins referred to above are precipitated
and lost. In order to establish a basis of comparison relative to
the composition of natural raw beef juice a number of samples were
prepared under known conditions and submitted to analysis. The results
contained in the subjoined table clearly show that meat juices made
under known conditions vary according to the mode of preparation, but
it is evident that practically one-half of the nitrogen is present as
coagulable protein.
FOOD VALUES
In order to arrive at the food value of any commodity it is necessary
to consider its chemical composition, available potential energy,
absorbability, etc. On referring to the analytical table it will be
found that the amount of inorganic material in meat juices Nos. 7
and 10 is unduly high. It appears that sodium chlorid, per se, has
been added to both Bovinine and Wyeth’s Beef Juice probably as a
preservative in the latter and for condimental purposes in the former.
The relative and absolute proportions of phosphatic material in both
products is excessive. The other constituents present in the ash are
those usually found in meat products.
The amount of sugar and glycerin in Carnine is interesting. These
agents may be added for preserving purposes, but the resulting product,
on account of its syrupy appearance, leads to the belief and is so
represented, that it is a concentrated food. Glycerin is also present
in Bovinine and Valentine’s meat juice. Bovinine in addition contains
about 8 per cent. alcohol.
The total nitrogen content of the trade products excepting Carnine,
is greater than the amount of nitrogen present in meat juices proper,
but the relative amount of nitrogen present as coagulable protein--the
valuable part of meat juice--is much greater in the latter. In fact,
the amount of coagulable protein present in Valentine’s Meat Juice may
be considered _nil_, which indicates that an unduly high temperature
is used in its preparation. In this connection it should also be
noted that even a moderate elevation of temperature influences the
chemical composition of meat juices. For example, the coagulable matter
present in Nos. 3, 4 and 5, is approximately one-half that present
in Nos. 1 and 2, which appears to indicate that the best product can
be made without the use of any heat whatever. Several of the trade
products, namely Nos. 7, 8 and 9, contain about as much coagulable
material as meat juice made by heating beef to 60 C. According to
the formula appearing in a circular of the Bovinine Company, a part
of the coagulable matter is present in the form of egg albumin, but
the company claims egg albumin is not used at present. In the case of
Carnine, the coagulable matter appears to be introduced by the use
of blood itself. The exact nature of the coagulable protein matter
in Wyeth’s Beef Juice has not been ascertained. It is well known
to manufacturers and physiologic chemists that it is practically
impossible to manufacture a genuine meat juice possessing a reasonable
amount of coagulable proteins, which is stable without a preservative.
Meat juices, in addition to the coagulable protein material, contain
other protein bodies such as albumoses and peptones. These bodies are
largely formed from the original protein bodies present in the meat
juice during the process of manufacture. They are highly nutritious and
largely and readily absorbed from the alimentary canal, but the amount
of these bodies present in the trade products is relatively small
excepting in Bovinine, which is not a meat juice, particularly when the
high prices are considered.
A considerable proportion of the nitrogenous matter contained in
Valentine’s and Wyeth’s products is present in the form of amino bodies
frequently included in the general term, “extractives.” These bodies
may be oxidized in the body and thus supply heat in a manner similar to
alcohol, but it should be remembered that there still appears to be a
wide difference of opinion among various observers on this point. Some
appear to be of the opinion that the amino bodies are devoid of food
value in that these bodies appear in the urine practically unchanged.
It would, therefore, appear that the value of the amino bodies is
largely of a stimulant character.
The food value of meat juices, therefore, resides largely, if not
solely, in the coagulable and other protein material present. Comparing
the calorific value or potential energy available in meat juices proper
on this basis with that present in the commercial products, excluding
Bovinine, it will be seen that on the average the genuine meat
juices--that is, those made by pressure, direct from the meat itself as
wanted--are much superior to the commercial products, notwithstanding
the marked concentration in some cases. The calories given in the
accompanying table do not include sugar, alcohol or any other added
material of this character.
WYETH’S BEEF JUICE
“Wyeth’s Beef Juice” is not a true beef juice, but resembles rather a
diluted meat extract. It contains much added inorganic matter, is low
in coagulable proteins, and considering the degree of concentration,
relatively deficient in nutritive value. Some of the claims contained
in the circular accompanying this preparation, in view of its
composition set forth above, may be of interest:
“Wyeth’s Beef Juice ..., containing two fluid ounces and
representing three pounds of prime lean beef,...”
“... beef extracts made by the Liebig process are utterly devoid of
the valuable and nutritious albuminous constituents of meat,...”
[Wyeth’s Beef Juice] “should not be compared with ordinary beef
extract,...”
COMPOSITION OF MEAT JUICES
COLUMN HEADINGS:
1 = Name of Preparation
2 = Per cent. volatile matter 100 C.
3 = Per cent. inorganic matter
4 = Per cent. sodium chlorid
5 = Per cent. phosphoric pentoxid (P_{2}O_{5})
6 = Per cent. ether extract, glycerol and undetermined matter
7 = Per cent. total nitrogen
8 = Per cent. coagulable proteins (N × 6.25)
9 = Per cent. other proteins (N × 6.25)
10 = Amino bodies (N × 3.12)
11 = Calories per 500 gm. obtained from protein factor 4.8
12 = Calories per 500 gm. obtained from amino bodies factor 0.56
==================+=====+=====+====+====+=====+====+====+=====+====+======+=====
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12
------------------+-----+-----+----+----+-----+----+----+-----+----+------+-----
TRADE PRODUCTS: | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Chuck beef, | | | | | | | | | | |
cold pressed |86.85| 1.86| .20| .31| 1.32|1.74|6.13| 2.94| .90|217.68| 2.52
| | | | | | | | | | |
Round beef, | | | | | | | | | | |
cold pressed |85.76| 1.53| .12| .37| .75|2.08|8.56| 2.37|1.03|262.32| 2.88
| | | | | | | | | | |
Chuck beef | | | | | | | | | | |
pressed at 60 C. |91.90| 1.29| .19| .29| .81|1.09|2.56| 2.50| .84|121.44| 2.35
| | | | | | | | | | |
Chuck beef | | | | | | | | | | |
pressed at 60 C. |89.56| 1.27| .16| .37| 2.98|1.09|3.00| 2.63| .56|135.12| 1.57
| | | | | | | | | | |
Round beef | | | | | | | | | | |
pressed at 60 C. |90.65| 1.36| .16| .36| 2.09|1.16|4.25| .31|1.34|109.44| 3.75
| | | | | | | | | | |
Chuck beef | | | | | | | | | | |
heated six hours | | | | | | | | | | |
before pressing |98.11| .39| .05| .12| .25| .24|....| 1.00| .25| 24.00| .70
60-100 C. | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
MADE IN | | | | | | | | | | |
LABORATORY: | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Beef Juice, | | | | | | | | | | |
John Wyeth & Bro.,|58.84|16.21|6.71|3.27|12.51|3.15|2.88| 3.56|6.00|154.56|16.80
Philadelphia, Pa. | | | | | | [V]| | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Bovinine, | | | | | | | | | | |
The Bovinine Co., | | | | | | | | | | |
75 W. Houston St.,|80.40| 1.55|1.05| .09| 3.64|2.36|3.38|10.75| .28|339.12| .78
New York City | [W] | | | | [X] | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Carmine Co., | | | | | | | | | | |
Lefranco, Paris, | | | | | | | | | | |
France; Imported | | | | | | | | | | |
by Fougera & Co., | | | | | | | | | | |
Agents, New York |24.80| .86| .09| .33|68.94| .96|2.25| 2.56| .59|115.44| 1.65
City | [Y] | | | | [Z] | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Meat Juice, | | | | | | | | | | |
M. J. Valentine, |57.64|10.26|1.77|3.41|20.41|3.06| .19| 5.44|6.06|135.12|16.97
Richmond, Va. | | | | |[AA] |[AB]| | | | |
------------------+-----+-----+----+----+-----+----+----+-----+----+------+-----
[V] Including 0.20 per cent. as NH_{3};
[W] 8.17 per cent. alcohol found;
[X] 3.1 per cent. glycerol found;
[Y] vacuum 70 C.;
[Z] 47.50 per cent. cane sugar--14.2 per cent. glycerol found;
[AA] 8 per cent. of glycerol found.
[AB] including 0.22 per cent. NH_{3};
The several samples of beef juice were prepared from practically fat
free, finely comminuted, chuck and round beef, first by pressure at
the ordinary temperature; second, by heating the prepared meat for
several hours at 60 C., then submitting to pressure. Sample No. 6
was made from chuck beef, prepared as above, by heating six hours at
from 60 to 100 C., and expressing after cooling. It is not a beef
juice proper but was prepared, analyzed and added to the list for
information. Its composition resembles several commercial articles
closely. A number of products represented and sold as meat juice
in the United States were analyzed and the results recorded in the
accompanying table.
BOVININE
Bovinine, advertised as a “condensed beef juice prepared by a cold
process” is a mixture of alcohol, glycerin, added sodium chlorid,
and apparently some form of defibrinated blood. According to the
manufacturer’s literature egg albumin was used formerly but this
ingredient is said to be no longer employed. It is not a meat juice in
any sense of the word. Numerous misrepresentations will be found on the
label and in the literature of Bovinine, of which the following are
typical:
“The blood of selected steers prepared by a cold process,
furnishing a perfect food, free from insoluble elements.”
“The rapidity with which Bovinine is absorbed and assimilated in
the stomach ...”
“It supplies complete nutrition to the patient.”
“Bovinine contains all the elements of the animal, vegetable
and mineral kingdoms for the production of new blood with great
rapidity. Its principal constituents have been selected with a view
to furnish the largest amount of nutriment in the most condensed
form and all the resources of modern chemical analysis have been
brought to bear on this important problem.”
A series of experiments carried out with dogs under anesthesia, by
injecting Bovinine into the stomach, the pyloric end of which was
ligated, shows that Bovinine is not readily absorbed and assimilated
by the stomach as claimed. The amount of protein material found in
the stomach at the end of one-half hour to one hour and a quarter was
practically equal to the amount introduced by the Bovinine.
It is also represented that Bovinine is of great service in case of
an irritable stomach. This is not borne out by experiment. Bovinine
fed to dogs by the mouth, either alone or mixed with food, induced
vomiting, which was less marked when Bovinine was given with the
regular diet. An examination of the urine of these animals showed
a marked diminution of the amount of indican, while the ethereal
sulphates were enormously increased, both absolutely and relatively,
when Bovinine was given. Experiments on rabbits have shown that
Bovinine injected into the peritoneal cavity was invariably followed
by large quantities of albumin in the urine, which persisted for from
twenty-four to forty-eight hours. Thirty to 50 c.c. per kilo given by
mouth daily caused emaciation and weakness; in some cases, irritation
of the gastro-intestinal canal, with death of the animal in from seven
to twelve days.
CARNINE
Carnine is a French preparation imported into the United States by
Fougera & Co., of New York City. In physical appearance it looks like
highly concentrated food, but analysis shows that it consists of a
small proportion of defibrinated blood dissolved in a mixture of syrup
and glycerol, the whole agreeably flavored. It is represented as a
“juice of rare meat, prepared by cold process. Each tablespoonful
represents 100 gm. of raw meat, or 3-1/2 ounces.” It is clear that
Carnine is not a meat juice in any sense of the word.
VALENTINE’S MEAT JUICE
Valentine’s Meat Juice resembles in physical appearance taste, odor
and by chemical analysis a diluted meat extract. The nutritive value
of meat extracts is virtually _nil_, as is well known by the medical
profession. Notwithstanding the composition of Valentine’s Meat Juice
and the fact that beef extract represents little nutritive value, the
manufacturer makes the following misleading representations:
“The two-ounce oval bottle, adopted for the Meat Juice contains
the concentrated juice of four pounds of the best beef, exclusive
of fat; or the condensed essence of one and a half pints of pure
liquid juice which is obtained from the flesh of beef.”
“The use of _hot water_ with the Meat Juice _changes its character
and impairs its value_.” [Italics in original.--Ed.]
The company must certainly be aware of the fact that its product
contains little, if any, coagulable proteids.
CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion: Neither Bovinine nor Carnine is a meat juice, the former
is anything but palatable and the latter soon cloys. “Valentine’s Meat
Juice” and “Wyeth’s Beef Juice” are virtually diluted meat extracts,
which are known to possess little food value. A physician depending
on any of the foregoing products to supply material nourishment, in
case of serious illness, is deceiving himself, starving his patients,
and may be lessening their chances for recovery. If a patient recovers
while using these commodities, it is certainly not due to the food
value contained in them--(_From The Journal A. M. A., Nov. 20, 1909._)
VALENTINE’S MEAT JUICE[AC]
Report of the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry
[AC] See also preceding report on Meat and Beef Juices, and article on
Meat Extracts and Meat Juices, p. 470.
Some time ago the Council authorized publication of a report[AC]
dealing with the composition and claims made for a number of the
more generally advertised meat and beef juices. Among these was
Valentine’s Meat Juice. This it was shown was sold under an incorrect
name, the claims for its composition were not truthfully stated and
its exploiters made false and misleading claims in regard to its
food value. As Valentine’s Meat Juice is still widely advertised the
referee in charge of this class of products deemed a reexamination of
the product advisable. This was made and on it was based the following
report which has been submitted to the Council, adopted, and its
publication authorized.
W. A. Puckner, Secretary.
Your referee has had examined recently purchased specimens of
Valentine’s Meat Juice (Valentine’s Meat Juice Company, Richmond,
Va.). The examination shows that it has virtually the same composition
as that given in the report of the Council “Meat and Beef Juices”
published in The Journal, Nov. 20, 1909. It contains practically no
coagulable protein material, one of the products characteristic of a
meat juice. It is essentially a diluted meat extract.
The following statement found in former circulars now seems to have
been eliminated:
“The two-ounce oval bottle, adopted for the Meat Juice contains
the concentrated juice of four pounds of the best beef, exclusive
of fat; or the condensed essence of one and a half pints of pure
liquid juice which is obtained from the flesh of beef.”
An endeavor is still made, however, to convey the idea that the product
contains coagulable protein, as shown by the following:
“Boiling water changes the character of the preparation.”
“The use of boiling water with the Meat-Juice changes the character
of the Preparation.”
The proprietors undoubtedly know that the product does not contain
any coagulable material and that the statements just quoted are plain
misrepresentations.
The advertising circular contains a large number of “Testimonials
of the Medical Profession.” As all are undated, one cannot tell how
old these testimonials are. One physician recommends it highly for
hypodermic use; another says, “I have kept cases on it and it alone
for days, without attempting to give any other food, and the results
have been entirely satisfactory.” According to another, it is “most
invaluable in typhoid fever and also in diphtheria.”
Valentine’s Meat Juice conflicts with the following rules of the
Council:
_Rule 1_, in that its composition is not correctly given;
_Rule 6_, in that unwarranted therapeutic claims are made, the
profession being led to believe that the product is highly nutritious
and is valuable in the treatment of pneumonia, diphtheria and typhoid
fever;
_Rule 8_, in that the name is objectionable, for while sold as a meat
juice, in reality it has the character of a meat extract.
Valentine’s Meat Juice is a fraud on the public, and in view of its
continued exploitation under false claims, the referee recommends
that the Council reiterate its former condemnation and authorize the
publication of this report.
[Editor’s Note.--The difference between meat extracts and meat juices
was fully discussed in the previous report of the Council, Meat
“juices” are made by the cold expression of meat with subsequent
evaporation, in such a way that the nutritious coagulable proteins
remain in solution. In making meat “extracts,” heat is used which
almost completely removes the coagulable proteins and thus renders it
practically devoid of nutrient qualities.
A list of some of the medical journals that carry advertisements of
Valentine’s Meat Juice, follows:
_Pediatrics_
_Old Dominion Journal of Medicine & Surgery_
_Medical World_
_Virginia Medical Semi-Monthly_
_Medical Times_
_American Medicine._]--(_From The Journal A. M. A., May 2, 1914._)
MEDICINAL FOODS
A report, of which the following is an abstract, was submitted to the
Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry by the subcommittee which examined
the medicinal foods:
In order to determine the food value of any food product it is
necessary to consider the following points: Chemical composition;
available potential energy; absorbability and cost. No attempt is
made in this article to discuss each of these features separately,
but they are utilized as required.
The ingredients on which the food value of any article of food
depends are the proteid substances, carbohydrates, fats, certain
inorganic bodies and--under certain conditions--alcohol. The amount
of each of these present in a preparation must be established by
chemical analysis. From the results thus obtained it is possible to
calculate the potential energy represented by a given food product.
In this report the potential or food value is expressed in the large
or kilocalorie, that is, the amount of heat required to raise the
temperature of one kilogram of water one degree centigrade.
The factors employed in this report for expressing in calories the
actual amount of energy utilized by the system are 4.8 for proteid
substances, 4.1 for carbohydrates, and 9.2 for fats.
The accompanying table embodies the results obtained by submitting
all the well-known so-called “predigested foods” to chemical
examination. The table as published in The Journal included columns
on: Price of bottle, number of cubic centimeters in a bottle, cost
per 500 cubic centimeters, reaction, specific gravity, percentage
of non-volatile residue, ash, percentage of nitrogen, calories as
proteids in 500 grams, carbohydrates before inversion, alcohol by
volume, average recommended adult dose per diem in cubic centimeters,
cost per diem to supply 1,430 calories. These columns were eliminated
from this abstract, as they were unessential, so far as the practical
value of the article is concerned. In most cases two samples of the
same brand were purchased at an interval of about six months. All
the analyses were made before Jan. 1, 1907. Some of the preparations
contain much glycerin which does not, so far as known at present,
possess any recognized food value, although there are a number of
experiments on record to indicate that it influences metabolism.
The percentage of nitrogen accredited to each of these products
represents the total amount of nitrogen, irrespective of the nature
of the nitrogenous substances, although some of this nitrogen has no
nutritive value.
By multiplying the percentage of nitrogen found by the factor 6.25
we obtain the percentage of nitrogenous matter (proteids) contained
in the various preparations. By multiplying the number of grams of
nitrogenous matter present in 500 grams of material by the factor 4.8
it is found that the potential energy available by the nitrogenous
matter varies from 10.3 calories to 153.1 calories. Five hundred
grams of the material is made the basis of calculation, because it
approximates a pint, the amount usually believed to be present in
the various trade packages, and because it affords a ready basis of
calculation.
The carbohydrates are represented by cane sugar, maltose, dextrin and
invert sugar. Lactose is probably also present in some, but it is
impossible to establish this. By multiplying the number of grams of
carbohydrates present in 500 grams of the foods by the factor 4.1 we
obtain the potential energy represented by the carbohydrate, which
varies from 11.3 to 319.2 calories. The total calorific value of
both proteids and carbohydrates ranges from 54.7 to 397.5 calories.
The total food value of an equal quantity of milk, including fat,
approximates 360 calories.
The value of alcohol as a food product pure and simple in disease
is, however, an open question. There is no doubt whatever but that
it acts to a certain degree as a food even here, not as a tissue
builder, but as a saver of fat and carbohydrate material, and in
order to give the preparations in question full value as food
products, the calories represented by the alcohol, are credited to
each preparation, as are the proteids and carbohydrates. The factor
usually recognized for expressing the calorific value of alcohol is
7. By multiplying the number of grams of alcohol present in 500 grams
of material by 7, the number of calories varies from 420 to 658.
On looking over the literature and printed matter distributed by some
manufacturers, the physician is frequently left under the impression
that these preparations contain all the essential constituents
necessary for maintaining normal nutrition of the body, as is clearly
shown by the following quotation: “Contains sufficient nutritive
material to maintain normal nutrition of the body, a valuable food in
typhoid fever, pneumonia, tuberculosis, ... and all the conditions of
the system associated with enfeebled digestion and malnutrition.”
In order to show the insidiousness of such representations it is only
necessary to give the actual food value of the average daily dose
(the average amount to be taken for twenty-four hours) recommended
by the various manufacturers for their products. The average adult
daily dose recommended varies from 50 to 150 c.c. The total available
calories per daily dose based on the proteid and carbohydrate bodies
varies from 9.8 to 110.5. Adding to these figures the amount of
energy represented by the alcohol, in each case, the total available
calories varies from 55.0 to 299.5. The number of calories per diem
in sickness should not fall much below 1,500 during twenty-four
hours.
TABULATED RESULTS OF EXAMINATIONS OF MEDICINAL FOODS
COLUMN HEADINGS:
1 = Name of Preparation and Manufacturer
2 = Glycerin and undetermined matter
3 = Per cent nitrogenous matter (6.26)
4 = Calories as proteids in 500 grams
5 = Carbohydrates after inversion
6 = Calories as carbohydrates in 500 grams
7 = Calories as proteids and carbohydrates in 500 grams
8 = Alcohol, by weight
9 = Calories as alcohol in 500 grams
10 = Calories as proteids and carbohydrates per diem dose
11 = Total calories in per diem dose[AD]
12 = Number c.c. required per diem to supply 1,430 calories
=================+=====+====+=====+=====+=====+=====+====+=====+=====+=======+=======
| | | | | | | | | | |
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12
| | | | | | | | | | |
----------------+-----+----+-----+-----+-----+-----+----+-----+-----+-------+-------
Carpanutrine | | | | | | | | | | |
--John Wyeth |28.45|4.28|102.7| 5.34|109.5|212.2|12.5|437.5| 25.5| 78.0|1,100.7
& Brother | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Carpanutrine | | | | | | | | | | |
--John Wyeth |21.29|6.24|149.8| 5.78|118.5|268.3|14.0|490.0| 32.2| 91.0| 942.9
& Brother | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Liquid Peptones | | | | | | | | | | |
--Eli Lilly & | 3.63|4.50|108.0| 6.05|124.0|232.0|18.0|630.0| 69.6| 258.6| 829.4
Company. | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Liquid Peptones,| | | | | | | | | | |
with Creosote | | | | | | | | | | |
--Eli Lilly & | 4.34|3.84| 92.2|13.47|276.1|368.3|18.0|630.0|110.5| 299.5| 716.2
Company | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Nutrient Wine of| | | | | | | | | | |
Beef Peptone-- |14.97|0.64| 15.4|15.43|316.3|331.7|17.5|612.5| 66.3| 188.8| 757.4
Armour & Company| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Nutrient Wine of| | | | | | | | | | |
Beef Peptone-- |13.70|0.43| 10.3|15.57|319.2|329.5|17.0|595.0| 65.9| 184.9| 773.3
Armour & Company| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Nutritive Liquid| | | | | | | | | | |
Peptone--Parke, | 1.02|1.86| 44.6|12.89|264.2|308.8|18.8|658.0| 74.2| 232.1| 739.5
Davis & Company | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Nutritive Liquid| | | | | | | | | | |
Peptone--Parke, | 1.95|1.16| 27.8|13.19|270.4|298.2|17.7|619.5| 71.5| 220.2| 779.2
Davis & Company | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Peptonic Elixir | | | | | | | | | | |
--Wm. Merrell | 3.21|2.54| 61.0|11.46|234.9|295.9|16.5|577.5| 53.3| 157.2| 818.6
Chemical Company| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Tonic Beef | | | | | | | | | | |
S. & D.-- |12.91|3.40| 81.6| 2.36| 48.4|130.0|12.0|420.0| 13.0| 55.0|1,300.0
Sharp & Dohme | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Tonic Beef | | | | | | | | | | |
S. & D.-- |12.63|3.28| 78.7| 2.22| 45.5|124.2|13.0|455.0| 12.4| 57.9|1,234.4
Sharp & Dohme | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Liquid Peptone | | | | | | | | | | |
--Stevenson & | 0.44|1.81| 43.4| 0.55| 11.3| 54.7|12.0|420.0| 9.8| 85.4|1,506.8
Jester Company | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Cow’s Milk | | | | | | | | | | |
(3.8 per cent. | -- |3.50| 84.0| 4.80| 98.4|182.4| -- | -- | 7.3|1,429.6|2,000.0
fat) | | | | | | | | | | |
----------------+-----+----+-----+-----+-----+-----+----+-----+-----+-------+-------
[AD] Total calories per diem dose includes the calories of alcohol in
the liquid medicinal foods and the calories of the fat in milk.
In order to get a fair conception of the actual food value of these
various preparations, it is desirable to make some comparison which
can be readily comprehended by every physician. The amount of good
milk necessary each twenty-four hours to sustain the vitality of
a patient during a serious illness is not less than 64 ounces, or
approximately 2,000 c.c. The food value in calories represented by
this amount of good milk may be placed at 1,430. This includes not
only the proteid and carbohydrate matter, but the fat as well. By
comparing this available potential energy with the total energy
available in the predigested foods under consideration, it can be
readily seen that if a physician depends on the representations made
by some of the manufacturers, and feeds his patient accordingly, he
is resorting to a starvation diet. The largest number of available
calories, including alcohol, present in any of the recommended daily
doses, is less than one-fifth of the number of calories represented
by 2,000 c.c. of milk; and the calories represented by the daily dose
of the preparation poorest in food products is only one-twenty-fifth
of the amount present in 2,000 c.c. of milk. These figures tell their
own story.
Making 2,000 c.c. of milk the basis of calculation, and estimating
the amount of the various preparations required to yield this number
of calories, it is found that the quantity to be administered daily
to supply 1,430 calories, including alcohol, varies from 716.2 to
1,506.2 c.c. In many cases the amount of alcohol exhibited by these
quantities would keep the patient in an alcoholic stupor continually.
The cost necessary to supply this energy varies from $1.48 to $3.39.
Compare these prices with the cost of two quarts of milk. Is further
comment necessary?
It is urged in justification of the use of preparations of this class
that they contain constituents not found in our ordinary foods and in
a more perfectly assimilable condition. As pointed out above, these
so-called predigested foods contain no fats; the carbohydrates in
them are the ordinary sugars present in our common foods, while the
proteins belong to the peptone or albumose class. It is for these
latter that the greatest claims are made, but even here no value can
be pointed out not found in whey, peptonized full milk or peptonized
skimmed milk.
There is likewise another point of considerable importance to
consider in this connection. The terms _peptone_ and _albumose_
include bodies of very uncertain composition, and their suitableness
as food substances depends largely on how they are prepared. Animal
experiments have shown that nitrogen equilibrium may be maintained,
for a time at least, by use of enzymic hydrolytic products of the
proteins, even where the hydrolysis has been carried far beyond the
so-called peptone stage, but it appears to be likewise true that the
mixtures secured by acid or high temperature steam hydrolysis have no
such value. Some of these, indeed, may exhibit a toxic behavior. This
is true in particular of some of the commercial varieties of peptone,
and until more is known of the source of the bodies of protein
character employed in the makeup of these “predigested” mixtures
it is unwise to assume anything concerning the food value of the
nitrogen compounds found in them by analysis or even to dignify them
by the name of foods.--(_Abstracted from The Journal A. M. A., May
11, 1907._)
MIGRAININ
Report of the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry
The Council, having voted to rescind the acceptance of Migrainin and
to omit it from New and Nonofficial Remedies (Appendix), directed
publication of the report given below.
W. A. Puckner, Secretary.
SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT ON MIGRAININ
_To the Council_:--Koechl & Co., American agents for Migrainin (Meister
Lucius & Bruning) asserted that this preparation was a mixture of
antipyrin 85 parts, caffein 9 parts and citric acid 6 parts. The
experiments of F. Zernik (_Apoth.-Ztg._, 1906, p. 686), however, showed
that Migrainin consisted of antipyrin 90.88 parts, caffein 8.4 parts
and citric acid 0.45 parts. When the attention of Koechl & Co. was
called to this they informed the Council, on June 20, 1907, that the
formula they gave was given them direct by the manufacturers abroad and
that they, Koechl & Co., did not question its accuracy. They, however,
offered to “write abroad and have the manufacturers confirm the formula
as given.” On July 23, 1907, Koechl & Co. wrote the secretary of
the Council that the manufacturers had informed them that Migrainin
contains 90 per cent. antipyrin and 9.1 per cent. caffein citrate.
This being an acknowledgment that the former statement submitted was
incorrect, the Council voted that the approval of Migrainin should be
reconsidered. Examination of the product, therefore, was taken up in
the Association’s laboratory and an original specimen, purchased in
Chicago, was found to contain moisture 0.7 per cent., antipyrin 90.93
per cent., and instead of caffein citrate 9.1 per cent., citric acid
0.51 per cent., caffein 8.53 per cent. This analysis agreed essentially
with the composition of Migrainin as found by Zernik.
While the discrepancies between the statement of the firm and the facts
are perhaps not great, nevertheless they show that even the formula
last given is incorrect, and that the statements of Koechl & Co., while
no doubt made in good faith, were in this instance unreliable.
In recent advertising matter issued by Koechl & Co., “phenozon-caffein
citrate” is given as a synonym for Migrainin, one circular stating that
“Migrainin is phenozon-caffein citrate,” etc. In the same circular the
following also appears: “In the treatment of migraine with phenacetin
or antipyrin, the attack is delayed, while with Migrainin it is usually
permanently stayed.” This will, no doubt, lead physicians to infer
that Migrainin is not a mixture of antipyrin and caffein citrate, but
that it is some new compound. While the firm disclaims any intention
to mislead, it does not offer to withdraw or modify this circular. It
is recommended, therefore, that the approval of Migrainin be rescinded
and that it be omitted from New and Nonofficial Remedies.--(_From The
Journal A. M. A., June 5, 1909._)
NEURILLA
Report of the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry
The following report was adopted by the Council. Its publication was
authorized to show how a practically worthless mixture may be exploited
by means of ill-considered testimonials.
W. A. Puckner, Secretary.
Neurilla, which appears to be the sole product of the Dad Chemical
Company, New York, is advertised as
“The Ideal Nerve Calmant.”
“... a nerve tonic ... indicated in cases where the nerve centers
are poorly nourished and over-sensitive ...”
“... a stimulant to the nervous system.”
“A Valuable Aid in the Treatment of Fevers, Colds, La Grippe, etc.”
The following non-quantitative and indefinite formula is given on the
label of a recently purchased bottle of Neurilla:
“Prepared from Scutellaria Lateriflora, Passiflora Incarnata and
Aromatics.”
“Proportion of Alcohol 20.3%.
“Made by Dad Chemical Co., New York, U. S. A.
“Dose, One Teaspoonful Four Times a Day.”
According to the formula, then, this mixture contains, aside from
alcohol and aromatics, two vegetable drugs, scutellaria and passiflora,
on which the alleged virtues of the preparation must be presumed to
depend.
Scutellaria lateriflora, or skullcap, is a bitter drug, one of the many
“herbs” to which, on wholly unreliable “clinical evidence,” therapeutic
properties were at one time ascribed. Most pharmacologists do not
mention the drug, and those who do generally state that it has very
feeble therapeutic properties. It was admitted to the Pharmacopeia, but
in 1909 its deletion was recommended by a committee of the Section on
Practice of Medicine of the American Medical Association (The Journal
A. M. A., Sept. 4, 1909, p. 792). We understand that the next edition
of the Pharmacopeia will omit mention of skullcap.
Passiflora incarnata, or passion-flower, is another “herb,” which,
although known for about seventy years, has never gained the confidence
of the medical profession and has not even been admitted to the
Pharmacopeia. According to a Council Report:
“None of the evidence is sufficient to show that passiflora has
therapeutic value; hence it is deemed inadvisable to include the drug
in the list of nonofficial remedies” (The Journal A. M. A., March 19,
1910, p. 983).
On these two obsolescent “herbs,” then, rest the remarkable claims made
for Neurilla. A certain degree of appetizing effect may be expected
from the bitter taste and a very slight degree of physical stimulus
from the alcohol. Except for these effects--and they are largely
delusive and temporary--the preparation is therapeutically inert and
worthless.
The evidence on which the manufacturers of Neurilla base their
therapeutic claims appears to consist of testimonials from physicians.
As a matter of fact, this is true of practically all of the large group
of nostrums of which Neurilla is typical. An analysis of these Neurilla
testimonials brings out clearly what such “evidence” is worth.
ILL-CONSIDERED TESTIMONIALS
The testimonials for Neurilla have been given with reference to
indefinite conditions of nervousness that border on the psychic and
include hysteria, neurasthenia, neuralgia and the like. Nervousness and
indigestion are two diseases in which suggestion, especially when aided
by bitters and alcohol, produces temporarily a feeling of improvement.
As an illustration, take the following testimonial:
“But more striking was the following case: One evening between
5 and 6 o’clock I was sent for, family lives near me, and I was
informed that the young lady had promised to be bridesmaid, a
function she had never performed. Her mother said the daughter
would certainly drop in her tracks as she walked up to the altar
with the procession, and they had about concluded to send a note
saying to the parents of the bride that she could not come,
although that would be very disagreeable (and no less offensive,
said I). They agreed with me. I ordered Neurilla for two hours.
She went to church, and, I was informed the next morning, passed
through the dreaded ordeal simply fatigued, and was now fast asleep
on account of the nice effect of Neurilla.”
It might provoke a smile to think that a manufacturer would publish so
silly a testimonial were it not that the very fact of its publication
indicates that there are medical men thoughtless enough to read and
accept such stuff as reliable evidence as to the value of any product.
TESTIMONIALS GIVEN LONG AGO--THE REMEDY ABANDONED
A number of physicians who had given testimonials were asked in
writing whether the testimonials were genuine and whether they still
entertained the high opinion of Neurilla expressed at a former date.
Several replied that, if they had ever given such testimonials, they
had forgotten the circumstance. From the replies received we select the
following:
The testimonial which bears Dr. A’s name reads:
“_I am using Neurilla with most satisfactory results._”
Dr. A now says:
“=As to its positive value as a therapeutic agent I have not used
it enough to know.... If the language you quote ... appears as
given in or as a ‘testimonial’ it must in some way be garbled and
appears wholly without my knowledge or consent.=”
Dr. B is quoted as having written:
“_I do not often lend my influence to furthering the fame of a
proprietary remedy, but I have achieved such excellent results
from the use of Neurilla as a calmative in hysteria and other
nervous disorders, that I feel its manufacturers are entitled to an
acknowledgment of gratitude from me._”
Dr. B writes:
“=I have not prescribed a dose of the nostrum in years. The use of
my name in connection with Neurilla is unauthorized.=”
Dr. C once wrote:
“_I have used Neurilla with good results._”
Dr. C now writes:
=“In re ‘Neurilla’ I think I used the preparation once or twice and
it seemed to do good work, but if due to the preparation or other
influences, I am not able to verify. I have not used it since nor
will, as I am opposed to using these preparations except in certain
cases where the ℞ contains remedies whose value I have verified
under the most rigid tests.=
“=P. S. This testimonial must have been given many years ago.=”
Dr. D’s testimonial is admitted to be based on a single case:
“_I am using Neurilla in a bad case of neuralgic tic with very good
results on an aged lady. She has taken several bottles, and is
still taking it with very good results._”
Dr. D sums up his later experience by saying:
“=I have long since abandoned the use of Neurilla in practice.=”
The following bears Dr. E’s name:
“_I endorse Neurilla without hesitation. It meets all indications
for which it is intended._”
This is what Dr. E writes now:
“=As to the enclosed testimonial in regard to Neurilla said to
be written by me I have no recollection. I am not prescribing
Neurilla.=”
Dr. F’s experience is similar. The testimonial credited to him reads:
“_I have prescribed Neurilla in nervous disorders with good
results._”
Dr. F now writes:
“=I don’t remember of ever having prescribed ‘Neurilla’ or of
having given a testimonial for it or any other patent medicine if I
knew it to be so.=”
SUMMARY