The Propaganda for Reform in Proprietary Medicines, Vol. 2 of 2Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry (American Medical Association)
Science
The Propaganda for Reform in Proprietary Medicines, Vol. 2 of 2
Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry (American Medical Association)
Patent medicines
“... it is a straight solution of this mercurial compound, as
no alkaline iodide or other chemical is used to bring about the
solution.” “... It is probably the first and only one-percent oil
solution of straight mercury biniodide made in America....”
[The manufacturer, in a letter addressed to the secretary of the
Council, explains: “By straight solution, I mean that the solution
of the red mercuric iodid is effected without the aid of any
alkaline iodid or other chemicals.... Biniodol was first offered
early in 1912 ...”]
“Biniodol is, therefore, superior and much to be preferred to
other mercurials used for like purposes. It is highly active
therapeutically, producing the desired effects, usually without
the inevitable disadvantages of other mercurials. It rarely causes
salivation, diarrhea, or other symptoms of mercurial intolerance,
even when pushed to full therapeutic effect and when given for a
considerable period of time. Nor does it produce anemia.”
The Chemical Laboratory of the American Medical Association found that
Biniodol contained 1 per cent. of mercuric iodid and 2.5 per cent.
of guaiacol; hence the composition is essentially as claimed. It is
not true, however, that Biniodol is the “first and only one-percent
solution of straight mercury biniodide made in America.” As shown
in The Journal A. M. A., Dec. 9, 1914, p. 2247, formulas by Lemaire
and Dunning for making a “straight” solution of mercuric iodid were
published in this country in 1909 and 1910, respectively. Moreover, a
1 per cent. solution of mercuric iodid in oil is on the market and is
described in New and Nonofficial Remedies.
To determine whether or not Biniodol is “superior and much to be
preferred to other mercurials used for like purposes,” the Council
secured the cooperation of the Department of Dermatology and
Syphilology of the Western Reserve University cooperating with the
Cleveland City Hospital, and of the Johns Hopkins Hospital. Each
received three samples, labeled respectively, 1, 2 and 3: 1 contained
Biniodol; 2, a 1 per cent. solution of mercuric iodid in oil; 3, a
solution made up according to the formula of Biniodol, namely, 1 per
cent. of mercuric iodid and 2.5 per cent. of guaiacol in oil. All the
solutions were sterile. The investigators were not informed which
preparation was designated by the respective numbers, but they were
asked to use the preparations when intramuscular injections of a 1 per
cent. oily solution of mercuric iodid were indicated, and to note what
differences, if any, were observed following the use of the different
solutions regarding pain, discomfort, induration and any other
evidences of effects of the medicaments.
The Cleveland investigator reports that the patients were more or less
confused in their replies to inquiries and gave rather indefinite and
conflicting answers. After carefully tabulating the replies, however,
the following summary resulted:
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