The Propaganda for Reform in Proprietary Medicines, Vol. 1 of 2Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry (American Medical Association)
Science
The Propaganda for Reform in Proprietary Medicines, Vol. 1 of 2
Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry (American Medical Association)
Patent medicines
This case is offered to prove the absence of secretin and its effect
when given by the mouth. As evidence of hepatic insufficiency the
author apparently relies on the color of the stools, and for pancreatic
insufficiency he cites the high urea output. He claims that when the
pancreas does not furnish an efficient secretion, the proteins of the
food fail to be converted into amino-acids, and instead, raise the
percentage of urea. Consequently, he concludes that a high percentage
of urea indicates the absence of secretin. It is usually held that a
high percentage of urea depends on two factors, ingestion of a large
amount of protein and concentration of the urine. The author gives
no data as to the amount of albuminous food, the amount of urine,
or whether the percentage of urea was learned by examining a single
specimen or the total quantity for twenty-four hours. The mildest
judgment that can be passed on such clinical data is that they are
totally inadequate. Without doubt the percentage of urea could have
been reduced to “normal” by causing the patient to drink water freely.
The remaining cases show similar hasty conclusions from insufficient
data, rendering them worthless as evidence.
The G. W. Carnrick Company introduces a number of testimonials as
to the value of Secretogen. These testimonials are similar to all
testimonials. They include no evidence of careful diagnosis, and
present an uncritical estimate of the results. They show that the
writers have given Secretogen Elixir or Tablets indiscriminately in
almost the whole range of digestive disorders, in nephritis, neuralgia,
liver disease and gallstones, exophthalmic goiter, neurasthenia,
epilepsy, etc. As dependable evidence, these testimonials are not
worthy of consideration.
A rational basis for the therapeutic value of Secretogen is lacking for
the following reasons:
1. No evidence has been presented that the absence of secretin is a
cause of gastro-intestinal diseases. It is usually present, and if not
present, as in achylia gastrica, there is evidently some compensating
arrangement by which the pancreas is stimulated to perform its regular
functions.
2. There is no evidence that secretin in any form is physiologically
active when administered by the mouth.
REFERENCES
Fleig, M. C.: Action de la sécrétine, Arch. gén. de méd., lxxx, 24.
Charles, J. R.: Treatment of Diabetes with Secretin, Bristol
Med.-Chir. Jour., September, 1906; Med. Press and Circular, Nov. 21,
1906.
Meltzer, S. J.: Animal Experimentation in Relation to our Knowledge
of Secretions, Especially in Internal Secretions, The Journal
A. M. A., May 7, 1910, p. 1506.
Wentworth, A. H.: The Cause of Infantile Atrophy, Deduced from
A Study of Secretin in Normal and Atrophic Infants, The Journal
A. M. A., July 20, 1907, p. 204.
Bambridge and Beddard: Guy’s Hospital Reports, 1907, lxi, 161.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account