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 being the case, what shall the wise physician do? Shall he blindly
follow an authority of a past generation or shall he recognize that the
claims of an interested manufacturer ought not to weigh against the
consensus of his present-day confrères who have given the treatment
of syphilis their special attention? The exploitation of such a
preparation is deserving of strong censure. By such methods the firm
places itself on the same plane as those nostrum venders, who advertise
certain antiseptic sprays and gargles as cures for epidemic meningitis
and diphtheria and thereby deprive credulous victims of the curative
antitoxin treatment. Succus Alterans is not a new remedy on trial for
its possibilities of improvement in therapeutics; it is an old mixture
which has been tried and found wanting.--(_From the Journal A. M. A.,
June 26, 1909._)
SULPHO-LYTHIN
Report of the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry
Sulpho-Lythin is sold by the Laine Chemical Company, New York. In
the literature sent to physicians it is said: “This product, the
sulpho-phosphite of sodium and lithium (non-effervescent), is entirely
new and is unique in its action.”
Chemical analysis of a specimen of Sulpho-Lythin purchased in the open
market indicated its composition to be:
Sodium sulphate, anhydrous 10.51
Disodium hydrogen phosphate, anhydrous 56.67
Sodium thiosulphate, anhydrous 20.78
Sodium chlorid 5.98
Lithium, as citrate 3.12
Sulphur, free 0.16
Moisture 1.53
Loss 1.25
The examination, therefore, shows that Sulpho-Lythin is a mixture
consisting mainly of sodium sulphate and sodium phosphate and sodium
thiosulphate. The statement that it is a “sulpho-phosphite of sodium
and lithium,” therefore, is not correct, and a statement that “it
is entirely new and unique in its action” appears unwarranted and
misleading. It is, therefore, recommended that the preparation be
refused recognition. It is also recommended that an article be prepared
for publication calling attention to the exaggerated claims made for
Sulpho-Lythin.
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