Conflict with Rule 6.—The circular in the package advises the hypodermic use of this extract, not only in functional amenorrhea and the ordinary reflex consequences of physiologic or artificial menopause, but also in:
“ ‘neurasthenic’ symptoms during menstrual life”;
“sterility, not due to pyogenic infection or mechanical obstruction”;
“repeated abortions, not due to disease or mechanical factors”;
“hyperemesis in the early months of pregnancy.”
These are not stated merely as conditions in which various enthusiasts have tried corpus luteum, but as conditions “for which it will be found serviceable.”
It is not necessary to inform the medical profession that this statement is calculated to raise expectations which cannot possibly be fulfilled. Even the manufacturers seem to realize this; at least they speak somewhat indefinitely of “suitable cases,” “good judgment,” “real indications,” etc. But they proceed to nullify this warning—if it was intended as a warning—by their illustrations of unsuitable cases, for instance, “amenorrhea due to extreme anemia, dysmenorrhea due to cervical stenosis,” etc. Finally, they sum up the case:
“Therefore, additional emphasis on the necessity for the proper selection of cases is essential in order that this useful preparation may not be unjustly discredited.”
How these cases of sterility, abortions, etc., are to be selected is not revealed. In other words, the restriction is no more than a convenient device by which every improvement is to be attributed to the medicine, and every failure to the physician.
The referee recommends that Corpora Lutea (Soluble Extract), Parke, Davis & Co., be held ineligible to N. N. R., because it is a secret preparation advertised under extravagant claims.