PEACOCK’S BROMIDES AND CHIONIA
Reports of the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry
The Council has authorized publication of the following reports on Peacock’s Bromides and Chionia, sold by the Peacock Chemical Company, St. Louis.
W. A. Puckner, Secretary.
PEACOCK’S BROMIDES
This is another nostrum of the ordinary mixture type. Of the various statements concerning composition furnished by the company, the following gives as much information as any:
“In Peacock’s Bromides it is designed to unite fifteen grains of the purest bromides of Potassium, Sodium, Ammonium, Calcium and Lithium, in such proportion as to insure the bromine equivalent of potassium bromide. Each fluid drachm about equals, in medicinal strength, fifteen grains of potassium bromide.”
The label on the trade package indicates the presence of 10 per cent. of alcohol. It will be observed that the proportions of the different bromids are not stated. Hence, the assertion of the Peacock Chemical Company that “there is nothing secret in this compound” cannot be true. A physician prescribing it cannot know how much of each ingredient he is giving; it may be 141⁄2 grains of potassium bromid and 1⁄8 grain each of sodium, ammonium, calcium and lithium bromid, or any other of an enormous number of possible permutations of the proportions.
While the theoretical basis of bromid medication is not yet fully settled, the weight of the best pharmacologic authority and clinical experience is decidedly against the dogmatic claim of the Peacock Chemical Company that “the best result is obtained by prescribing a combination of bromides.” And if there were any advantage in prescribing such a combination, the physician ought to regulate the proportions.
The following quotations are from the advertising matter:
“Being uniform in purity and therapeutic power, it can be relied upon to produce clinical results which it is believed cannot be obtained from the use of commercial bromide substitutes.”
“The purity, quality and constant uniformity of this high grade product have long made it a standard bromide preparation.”
These claims are unfounded. The analyses published in the concern’s own advertising “literature” show a variation of 8 per cent., in the bromid content, which certainly indicates a sufficient lack of uniformity.
Again quoting:
“In order to insure the best results the bromides must be pure, i. e., free from alkalies and almost free from chlorides. The U. S. P. allows three per cent. of chlorides. Peacock’s Bromides contains the least possible amount of this impurity. Bromism is therefore less frequent in those cases in which this preparation is employed.”
In view of the claim of low chlorid content, it is interesting to note that the analyses above referred to show that the chlorid content is actually higher than that of some other bromid preparations on the market.
The claim of merit on the ground of freedom from chlorids is, of course, absurd, and must be regarded as an attempt to play upon the credulity of the doctor. As a matter of fact, the average individual takes with his food many times the amount of chlorid he could possibly take in contaminated bromid. The 10 per cent. of alcohol would undoubtedly have a greater disturbing influence on the bromid action than the amount of chlorid that might be present in any bromid on the market.
Then we have the statement that, owing to this freedom from chlorids:
“Bromism is therefore less in those cases in which the preparation is employed.”
Sodium chlorid, even as an impurity, would retard rather than favor the development of bromism; sodium chlorid is even used as an antidote in bromid poisoning.
The therapeutic claims lay stress on the value of the bromids in sleeplessness, epilepsy, sexual excitement, tetanus, infantile convulsions, chorea, delirium tremens, the climacteric, migraine, headache due to pelvic conditions, ovarian neuralgia, etc. These and other claims, while too vague to be branded as falsehoods, are misleading and not in accordance with modern teaching or practice; the latter recognize the limitations of bromid therapy as well as its scope and advantages. For instance, in epilepsy the company asserts that:
“Large doses must be given if we expect to control the convulsions. We are to be guided by the frequency and the severity of the seizures, the saturation of the system by bromides and by the age of the patient. The rule is ‘large doses for long periods but with occasional periodic monthly or quarterly omissions.’ When we have succeeded in controlling the convulsions in so far as greatly diminishing the frequency and severity of the attacks we may then attempt to decrease the dose, but the results must be carefully watched. Increase in frequency of convulsive seizures is a sign that the bromides must again be pushed as before.”
The best modern clinical teaching concerning the treatment of epilepsy is that bromids should be avoided except as a last resort. Bromids do not cure, and the amount necessary to control the convulsions may produce a degree of mental hebetude that is a greater evil than the disease itself.
It is recommended that the preparation be held ineligible for admission to N. N. R., because of its conflict with Rules 1, 4, 6 and 10 of the Council, and that this report be published.
CHIONIA
Chionia, according to the statement of the Peacock Chemical Company, which exploits the product, contains 19 per cent. alcohol and is “A Preparation of Chionanthus Virginica.”[4]
This preparation is advertised particularly as “a potent hepatic stimulant” and special claims are made for it in various disturbances of the liver:
“Chionia is very well adapted in the treatment of hepatic congestion owing to its specific action in depleting the portal circulation.”
In passive congestion of the liver, the manufacturers would have us believe
“... we have a drug in Chionia that will stimulate the circulation of the blood and lymphatics of the liver as well as stimulate its physiological activities and instead of the patient vomiting the blood an internal depletion of the liver occurs.”
“... in cases of simple jaundice due to circulatory (congestive) changes in the liver, Chionia is the drug ‘par excellence’ that will rapidly cause a disappearance of this symptom.”
As a prophylactic against eclampsia, if a history of torpidity of the liver is obtained:
“CHIONIA should be used during the major portion of child-bearing period because it acts directly on the liver stimulating its functional activity.”
Chionanthus virginica has never been shown to have the slightest pharmacologic activity and no evidence is presented that its offspring, Chionia, has any therapeutic value whatever in any disturbance of the liver. The promoters themselves indicate a lack of faith in their own preparation, for they advise the use of old and efficient forms of treatment along with Chionia—heart tonics and laxatives in passive congestion of the liver, mercurial purge or podophyllin and sodium phosphate in “biliousness,” and quinin in malaria. Finally, with delightful English and elaborate insouciance, they advise in the treatment of eclampsia:
“In all cases the uterus should be emptied as quick as possible. (Version of Cæsarian Section.)”
The physician who prescribes Chionia promotes a fraud.
The Council held Chionia ineligible for admission to N. N. R.
[Editorial Comment: In Peacock’s Bromides and Chionia the Peacock Chemical Company has, for a third of a century, been foisting on the medical profession nostrums composed of drugs that are easily combined in any proportion that the physician may want to prescribe. The company has been inflicting on the unthinking physician pseudo-scientific rubbish in the form of advertising literature that should long ago have been regarded as an insult to the intelligence of the medical profession. The following medical journals are carrying advertisements of Peacock’s Bromides and Chionia:
| Alienist and Neurologist | Medical Fortnightly |
| American Journal of Surgery | Medical Herald |
| American Medicine | Medical Record |
| Archives of Pediatrics | Medical Review of Reviews |
| Atlanta Journal-Record of Medicine | Medical Sentinel |
| Buffalo Medical Journal | Medical Standard |
| Charlotte Medical Journal | Medical Summary |
| Chicago Medical Recorder | Medical Times |
| Denver Medical Times and Utah Medical Journal | Medical World |
| Nashville Journal of Medicine and Surgery | |
| Eclectic Medical Journal | New Orleans Medical and Surgical Journal |
| Ellingwood’s Therapeutist | New York Medical Journal |
| Indianapolis Medical Journal | Pacific Medical Journal |
| International Journal of Surgery | Southern Practitioner |
| Lancet-Clinic | Texas Medical Journal |
| Louisville Monthly Journal of Medicine and Surgery | Texas Medical News |
| Therapeutic Gazette | |
| Maryland Medical Journal | Wisconsin Medical Recorder |
| Medical Brief | Woman’s Medical Journal] |
| —(From The Journal A. M. A., April 3, 1915.) |