“The literature furnished by the company abounds in suggestions that the mixture, as they prepare it, represents some unusual potency which is not possessed by the ordinary mixture of these same drugs in the same proportion. These suggestions may of course be dismissed without consideration. There is nothing mysterious in a mixture of potassium iodid and biniodid of mercury and this formula is no more entitled to special consideration than any other pill or tablet of the same composition prepared by any reputable pharmaceutical firm.
“The formula of this pill, however, does not represent a good combination. It is offered for use both during the active secondary period of syphilis and for tertiary lesions. The pill does not contain enough mercury to be an efficient remedy for secondary syphilis and not enough potassium iodid to be satisfactory in the treatment of tertiary lesions. It is neither fish, flesh, fowl, nor good red herring. A patient with secondary syphilis should not be dosed all the time with potassium iodid and for the treatment of tertiary lesions he should have a very much larger quantity of potassium iodid than can be given in these pills without giving toxic doses of mercury.
“The statement that this pill ‘does not impair the appetite nor disturb digestion and is well borne by patients who cannot tolerate iodids otherwise administered’ is a bald claim which cannot be justified by experience. The most unsatisfactory way of administering potassium iodid is in solid form. A patient who can stand potassium iodid in pill form, as it is furnished in this preparation, can stand it in any form in which it is ever administered.
“In short this preparation is neither agreeable nor efficient. The greatest objection to it is its inefficiency, for it is offered as an adequate preparation for the treatment of syphilis in all of its stages, whereas it is neither satisfactory for the treatment of secondary syphilis nor of tertiary lesions.”
During the fourteen years which have elapsed since the Council’s first examination of Pil. Mixed Treatment (Chichester), arsphenamin has been added to the syphilographer’s armamentarium and much has been learned about syphilis and its treatment. While there exist differences of opinion as to the exact value of arsphenamin in the treatment of syphilis and there are even some who desist from the use of arsenic compounds of any kind, no syphilographer of standing countenances the routine treatment of syphilis with a fixed combination of mercuric iodid and potassium iodid. The use of Pil. Mixed Treatment (Chichester) is on a par with the use of certain “blood purifiers” which were advocated at a time when the treatment of syphilis was a baffling problem.
PRESENT DAY CLAIMS
The present advertising, which reads as if it had been written in the heyday of proprietary license, is, in effect, an invitation to treat syphilis in its various stages and manifestations with Pil. Mixed Treatment (Chichester). If heeded by those who read the advertising of the Hillside Chemical Co., it will result in much harm to the public and the profession. For this reason, the present report of the Council is published as a protest against any advertising propaganda advocating the routine treatment of a disease which requires that each case be studied carefully so that prompt and efficient measures may be applied to the various manifestations of the disease.
The following advertisement appeared recently in several medical journals:
“Medicine is an Exact Science—on Paper Only!” Every general practitioner of medicine is called upon to treat Syphilis occasionally. He cannot depend upon the use of arsenicals alone. In most cases, “mixed treatment” the giving of mercury and iodides is required to get satisfactory results. Pil. Mixed Treatment (Chichester) accurately and successfully meets the indications and assures definite action. Important advantages: