“Gonorrhea and its Sequelæ” “Cystitis” “Tetanus” “Wounds complicated by gaseous gangrene” “Burns” “Old Suppurations, ulcers, abscesses, etc.” “Articular rheumatism” “Abscess Alveolar” “Pyorrhea Alveolaris” “Stomatitis (Canker-Sores).” Nearly two years ago the American agents requested the Council to consider Iodeol and Iodagol for admission to New and Nonofficial Remedies. The information submitted in regard to their character and composition was vague and indefinite, the pharmacologic information practically nil and the clinical data as voluminous as it was unconvincing. On the basis of chemical, pharmacologic, bacteriologic and clinical investigation carried out under the direction of the referee and a study of the submitted evidence, the referee reported: 1. Iodeol and Iodagol do not contain the amount of iodin claimed. 2. The iodin is not present as elementary iodin, but instead the preparations behave similarly to the well-known organic iodin compounds such as iodized fats. 3. The therapeutic claims made for the preparations are exaggerated and unwarranted. In view of his findings he recommended that Iodeol and Iodagol be declared inadmissible to New and Nonofficial Remedies for conflict with Rules 1 and 2 (misleading statements regarding composition and identification) and Rule 6 (unwarranted therapeutic claims). The Council adopted the recommendation of the referee, directing inclusion of the full report in the annual Council reports after submission to the manufacturer, and recommending publication of an abstract of this report in The Journal. This report was brought to the attention of the American agent, David B. Levy, Inc., and through them to the French manufacturers, E. Viel and Company. The manufacturers have intimated that they will not file a reply to the report. The firm of David B. Levy, Inc., has decided to sever its connection with these products and to discontinue their sale. W. A. Puckner, Secretary. Summary of Referee’s Report Iodeol and Iodagol were submitted to the Council nearly two years ago as “electro-colloidal iodine” and with the claim that they produced all the antiseptic and other effects of ordinary iodin without any of its side actions. The referee has done much work on the subject, conducted a large amount of correspondence and has contended with long delays. He feels that the consideration of these products should be brought to a conclusion and accordingly he submits this report of their consideration. The following is a summary of the report, which is appended: