The label describes Pam-ala as “An Effective Vegetable Remedy For MALARIA. Guaranteed free of any Quinine, or other harmful [_sic_] drugs.” It is said to be indicated in “Malarial Intermittent and Remittent Fevers, especially curative in Chronic Malaria and Malarial Cachexia and all conditions even where Quinine fails.” One tablespoonful three times a day is said to be the “Curative Dose,” while one tablespoonful three times a week is stated to be a “Prophylactic Dose.” The label further claims that Pam-ala “Surpasses Quinine in its action and has none of its Disadvantages.” Assertions that Pam-ala is superior to quinin are followed by the usual “guarantee” claim: “Guaranteed by the Pam-Ala Co. under the Drugs Act, June, 1906, Ser. No. 2909 A.” Finally, the label says that it is “Endorsed by Medical Authorities Throughout the world.” As regards the composition, a circular says that “PAM-ALA is a purely vegetable remedy for the cure, without Quinine, of all forms of Malaria.” “‘PAM-ALA’ is derived from a plant of the genus Umbelliferae, a native of the mountainous regions of Mexico and northern parts of South America. Its medicinal properties have not been known to anyone but the native Indians, who for years past have used it as a specific in all forms of fever and malarial diseases so prevalent in tropical countries. The seeds are more active as a therapeutic agent than the dried-up plant; hence their collection for medicinal purposes requires special skill in the selection of the same so as to be able to extract all the possible medicinal properties from them, viz., its active principle. An oil may be abstracted from the seeds which is of a yellow color with an intense characteristic odor.” At the close of the circular the following unenlightening formula appears: Each fluid ounce contains: Ext. Fid. Pam-ala 10 per cent. Alcohol 15 per cent. Ol. Aurant Syr. Sacchari aqua ad. q. s. 100 per cent. In addition to being a cure for malaria, Pam-ala is claimed to have a “favorable influence upon the broncho-pneumonia of measles ...,” “will avert an attack of acute catarrh,” and “abort acute tonsilitis.” The testimonials are of the usual character. Most of them seem to have been given some four years ago by physicians in Italy, Cuba, Porto Rico, Guatemala, etc., and therefore cannot readily be looked into. Two are of more recent date and come from physicians in this country. They furnish good illustrations of the manner in which proprietary concerns make use of opinions hastily formed and thoughtlessly put in writing. One testimonial was given in July, 1912: “I take pleasure in testifying to the seemingly marvelous and gratifying effect of Pam-ala in 2 cases of malaria....” On Jan. 2, 1914, its writer, in reply to an inquiry whether in the light of continued experience, his first estimate of Pam-ala had been confirmed, wrote: