“I have used Chloron on a series of cases (surgical) presenting pus foci and I have found the application very beneficial and healing, the pus early disappearing. In cases of Osteomyelitis, Suppurating Arthritis, Cellulitis and Chronic Ulcers, Chloron is particularly valuable, its good effects quickly observed and the time of restoration to health shortened.”

In the first case report, there is no evidence that Chloron is more efficient in the treatment of burns than any other commonly used procedure might have been. In the case of the varicose ulcers, while there was some apparent benefit from Chloron, no credit is given to rest and the general treatment which is known to be important in the treatment of such conditions. The evidence in the other case reports is quite inconclusive. Consideration of the “case reports” leads to the conclusion that clinical evidence for the value of Chloron is lacking.

Attention should be called to the fact that the amount of active chlorin, claimed to be present in Chloron as well as the amount found by the association laboratory, is less than that considered effective by Dakin, Dunham and others; seemingly in preparing Chloron no attention has been paid to the degree of alkalinity, yet the importance of this factor is now generally recognized.

Chloron fails to comply with the requirements for surgical solution of chlorinated soda (N. N. R., 1919, p. 133), yet the manufacturers make free use of the text of Dakin and Dunham’s Handbook of Antiseptics in their advertising pamphlet. Thus:

From the Chloron pamphlet:

“This ideal antiseptic effects com­plete ster­il­iza­tion within its sphere of action with­out caus­ing any dam­age to the cells or tis­sues. An im­por­tant method of judg­ing the in­juri­ous action of anti­sep­tics is to in­ves­ti­gate their ef­fects on the leuco­cytes. From ex­peri­ments in vitro by Parry Morgan and in vivo by Col. C. J. Bond with the strength of anti­sep­tics com­mon­ly used in sur­gery, it has been found that Chlorine anti­sep­tics and mer­cury salts have lit­tle ef­fect on phago­cyt­osis in com­pari­son with other germi­cides.

The ac­tivi­ty of the leuco­cytes from wounds which have re­cent­ly been treat­ed with CHLORON may be de­mon­strat­ed ex­peri­ment­ally.”

“In add­ition to its anti­sep­tic action CHLORON is a strong oxi­diz­ing agent and de­odor­ant and pos­ses­ses to a marked de­gree the prop­erty of de­com­pos­ing tox­ins. In this con­nec­tion it is in­ter­est­ing and per­tin­ent to note that Dean, by the regu­lat­ed action of hypo­chlor­ous acid, has pre­pared a non­toxic dys­en­tery vac­cine and it is now a com­mon ob­ser­va­tion that the free use of CHLORON may re­duce the con­sti­tu­tion­al symp­toms aris­ing from sep­tic pro­ces­ses and that they re­ap­pear on dis­con­tinu­ing the anti­sep­tic treat­ment.”

Dakin and Dunham Handbook of Antiseptics: