Kitabı oku: «Alcohol: A Dangerous and Unnecessary Medicine, How and Why», sayfa 18

CHAPTER XIII.
ALCOHOLIC PROPRIETARY OR ‘PATENT’ MEDICINES

America has been called the Paradise of Quacks, and with good reason. For years patent medicine manufacturers had such complete control of the American press, both secular and religious, that it was almost impossible to reach the public with information as to the real nature of these concoctions. Consequently the people accepted with amazing credulity the startling claims to miraculous cures of various pills and potions as set forth under glaring headlines in the daily papers. The publicity of the last few years has hurt the traffic seriously, but it still has a great hold upon the ignorant and credulous part of the population, and there is still a very large number of these preparations upon the market. Many persons think that the Pure Food Law guarantees every drug preparation now sold to be perfectly safe for use. This is a great error. The guarantee means simply that the manufacturer guarantees that his preparation is as he states upon the label; the government guarantees nothing concerning the matter. That the guarantee of the manufacturer is not always truthful has been shown by analyses of some preparations made by state and national chemists. All the advantage that the public has through the Pure Food Law, so far as drug preparations are concerned, is that the percentage of alcohol must be printed upon the label, and the presence of certain dangerous drugs, such as morphine, cocaine, and acetanilid must be indicated. Thus persons intelligent as to the nature of these drugs will avoid medicines which the label says contains them. The ignorant are not protected. It was difficult to secure even this small restriction upon the sale of proprietary medicines because of the opposition of a large number of newspaper publishers who were sharing the ill-gotten gains of the medical fakirs.

A careful compilation of manufacturers’ announcements list 1,806 so-called patent medicines sold in open markets, in which alcohol, opium or other toxic drugs form constituent parts. 675 of the preparations are known as “bitters,” stomachics, or cordials, and alcohol enters into their composition in quantities varying from fifteen to fifty per cent.; 390 are recommended for coughs and colds, nearly all of which contain opium. Sixty remedies are sold for the relief of pain, and no other purpose. 120 are for nervous troubles, and of this number, sixty-five have entering into their composition coca leaves, or kola nut, or both, or are represented by their respective active principles, cocaine or caffeine. 129 are offered for headaches, and kindred ailments, and usually with a guarantee to give immediate relief. In these are generally compounded phenacetine, caffeine, antipyrine, acetanilid, or morphine, diluted with soda, or sugar of milk. Dysentery, diarrhœa, cholera morbus, cramp in bowels, etc., have 185 quick reliefs or “cures” to their credit, nearly all of which contain opium, many of them in addition, alcohol, ginger, capsicum or myrrh in various combinations, and there are numerous cases on record where children and adults have been narcotized by their excessive use. Some manufacturers print on the labels covering these goods, words of caution limiting the amount to be taken. Forty-eight compounds for asthma contain caffeine and morphine. Sufferers from toothache have their choice from thirty-eight remedies, and thirty-six soothing, or teething, syrups are provided for infants.

Many people have ignorantly and innocently formed an alcohol, morphine, or cocaine habit through the use of patent medicines. Many deaths have occurred from headache powders of which acetanilid is the chief ingredient. Dr. Harvey W. Wiley, chief of the Bureau of Chemistry, says of these headache powders: —

“A woman has a headache and she uses one of these remedies. It relieves the pain. When she has another attack she uses it again and again with the same result. After a while she finds the usual amount of the remedy does not cure the pain. She uses two portions, and so the habit is formed until absolute danger is confronted. For one thing must not be forgotten: these remedies are powerful, for if they were not they would be of no effect. They are in certain doses deadly; they depress the nervous system; they disturb the digestion; they interfere with natural sleep; they require to be used in increasingly larger quantities as the system becomes accustomed to their use; they are almost without exception excreted by the kidneys, thus adding an additional burden to organs already badly overworked. They produce a habit of gaining relief which becomes an obsession and incapable of being resisted.”

It may be asked, “How is it if these mixtures are harmful only, that so many people profess to have received benefit from them?” There are different reasons for this.

1. The nature of such drugs as alcohol, opium and cocaine is to benumb sensation, so that pain is stilled, and the pain, or functional disturbance forgotten for the time, because the nerves are drugged into insensibility. The person feels better while under the influence of the drug, so thinks it is benefiting him.

2. There are people who imagine they have diseases which they do not have; since trained physicians occasionally err in diagnosis, it is not strange if the laity should do likewise. Such persons are always ready to aver that a certain medicine “cured” them.

A ludicrous example of this is a woman out West, whose picture graces the advertisements of a certain nostrum, accompanied by a testimonial that said nostrum cured her of a “polypus”! Upon being written to as to how such a preparation could effect such a cure, she answered that, after giving the testimonial, she found that she had not had a polypus!

3. Some of the cures attributed to drugs, are doubtless due to Nature. It is estimated that from 30 to 90 per cent. of ailments are cured by Nature, unassisted, and often in spite of, the drugs swallowed. Many of the books advertising these remedies (?) give excellent rules of health, which, if followed, would restore persons to vigor more speedily without the accompanying medicine, than they can be restored while the system has the poisonous drugs to throw off. It may be reasonably assumed that a goodly number of recoveries ascribed to drug treatments are due, in reality, to the resisting force of a good constitution, or to obedience to the laws of health given in the circular.

4. It is not uncommon for people suffering from certain diseases to have temporary remissions in the course of the disease. No doubt, some of the cases reported as cures are such spontaneous remissions, which are followed, after the testimonials have been written, by relapse. The majority of people are ignorant of the natural course of diseases – of what happens when no treatment is taken. They do not know that a great many affections are characterized by periods of apparent recovery. For instance in some varieties of paralysis, as well as in consumption, the sufferer may to appearance recover completely for a few months or longer; if a remedy was being used at the time, it would naturally get the credit of causing the favorable change.

However, all of the glowing testimonials of wonderful benefits accruing from patent medicines are not what they seem to be. Dr. J. H. Kellogg says in his Monitor of Health: —

“The average manufacturer of patent medicines regularly employs a person of some literary attainment whose duty it is to invent vigorous testimonials of sufferings relieved by Dr. Charlatan’s universal panacea. In many instances persons are hired to give testimonials, and answer letters of inquiry in such a way as to encourage business. The shameless dishonesty and ingenious villainy exhibited are beyond description.”

Recently an advertisement of one of these nostrums stated in the headlines that said nostrum was used in the Frances Willard Temperance Hospital, Chicago. The testimonial appended purported to be from a nurse in that hospital, but the testimonial did not state, as did the headlines, that the preparation was ever used in that hospital. The president of the hospital board of trustees states that the nurse positively denies having given any testimonial to the company thus advertising. She did give one to another patent medicine concern, but not to this, and never said either was used in the hospital, nor have they been. Suit could be brought for damages, but unfortunately the patent medicine people have unlimited money, and the hospital has not.

Early in the present year there appeared in many daily papers a large advertising picture of a man whose name was appended as a professional nurse of a western city.

The following testimonial accompanied the picture: —

“Mr. – of – , who is a professional nurse of experience, writes, – ‘My friend is improving, thanks to – , and you. I am called on to nurse the sick of all classes. I recommend – to such an extent that I am nicknamed – (giving name of nostrum) by nearly everybody.’”

As the writer of this book was acquainted with a physician residing in the small city mentioned in the advertisement, she wrote to him, requesting that he investigate this testimonial.

He replied that he found the chief part of the advertisement, namely, that Mr. – was a professional nurse, false; “First, by his own statement as he told me this morning that he never claimed to be a professional nurse. And my personal acquaintance with him, as well as that of a number of other physicians in our little city, and reliable men and women of this community who are acquainted with him, all testify to the same thing, namely; that he is not a professional nurse, neither is he a nurse, or even a reliable man. He is an innocent, ignorant man, very close to the pauper class. He told me when I read the commendation to which his name is affixed, that it was all true except the professional nurse part, and that was entirely false, as stated above.”

As the picture was of a fine-looking, intelligent-appearing man it probably was as genuine as the testimonial.

The following was clipped from a copy of Merck’s Report, April, 1899, a druggists’ paper published in New York city: —

Many Druggists Indignant

A PATENT-MEDICINE ADVERTISEMENT CONTAINS UNAUTHORIZED ENDORSEMENTS

“Fully a score of East-side druggists are up in arms over the unauthorized use of their names in a full-page newspaper advertisement of a widely-known specific. This advertisement appeared recently in certain New York daily papers, and retail druggists who have made it a rule of their business never to recommend any particular proprietary article, found themselves quoted in unqualified laudation of the article so liberally advertised. The names and addresses of the druggists were given in full, and when several of the men quoted conferred together they found that the most barefaced misrepresentation had been resorted to.

“One of the pharmacists thus misrepresented, happened to be Sidney Faber, the secretary of the Board of Pharmacy. He was not selling this particular specific, and had never said a word for or against it, nevertheless, six or eight lines of endorsement of the article were directly attributed to him. He called on some of his druggist neighbors whose names he saw in the advertisement, and ascertained that they, too, had been falsely and unwarrantably quoted. Mr. Faber promptly wrote to the proprietors of the specific in question, and denounced the published endorsements bearing his name, as a forgery. His indignation was by no means appeased when he received a letter from the proprietary concern, couched in the following language: ‘We regret to learn that you have been annoyed by any statements that have appeared in New York city papers. We will forward your letter to them.’

“Within the past few days several of the druggists whose names were used in this advertisement without authority, have been considering the advisability of taking legal proceedings in order to ascertain their rights in the matter. It is contrary to pharmaceutical ethics for a pharmacist to specially endorse any proprietary article, or patent medicine. Some of the offended druggists propose to contribute to a fund for the purpose of publicly, and widely, advertising this unwarranted use of their names.”

When patent medicine advertisers would dare to resort to such a wholesale fraud as this, what may they be expected to refrain from?

As an illustration of how commendations from notable persons are sometimes obtained, the following is cited: In the winter of 1899, appeared an advertising picture of the lovely Christian lady from Denmark, the Countess Schimmelmann, who was spending some time in Chicago. Below her picture were the words: —

“Adeline, Countess Schimmelmann, whose portrait is here given, in a recent letter to the – company, (mentioning proprietors of nostrum) speaks of friends of hers who have been benefited by – (mentioning nostrum), and who first advised her to recommend it to her sick friends.

“The Countess, as is well known, is a prominent member of the Danish court. Her coming to this country has been much talked of. Her real object is one of charity. She is stopping in Chicago, and from there writes her straightforward endorsement of – (mentioning nostrum).”

The italics are the writer’s. The picture and the testimonial were cut from the paper, and sent to the countess, asking if she had so spoken of this medicine, and, if so, did she, a strong total abstinence woman, know that this mixture contains a large percentage of alcohol.

She responded as follows: —

“Thank you for asking me about the enclosed. A white-ribbon lady came and asked me if I would do her the great kindness to recommend – compound (made up of the juice of celery). I said I could not personally recommend it as I neither use, nor want, medicine. But some very reliable friends of mine (temperance people, and true Christians) told me I would do a good thing in recommending it as they used it, and found it excellent. Then I wrote the following: ‘I myself cannot recommend – compound as I do not suffer from any of the ailments it is said to be good for, but reliable friends of mine tell me that it is excellent, and I would do a good thing in recommending it to my friends. Adeline, Countess Schimmelmann.’

“I will only consent to the publishing of this letter if you publish the whole letter, and no extract from it, as the white-ribbon lady did for the – compound.”

If a white-ribboner played this mean trick upon this distinguished Christian worker she is unworthy of membership in the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union. It is more than likely that the “white-ribbon lady,” was a paid advertising agent of the patent medicine manufacturer, and wore a white-ribbon to gain the confidence of the Countess.

Whether patent medicine manufacturers know how to doctor all ills to which human flesh is heir may be doubted, but that their advertising agents are skilful “doctors” of testimonials is very evident to any one acquainted with the facts.

The Department of Public Charities of New York city in a “Report on the use of so-called Proprietary Medicines as Therapeutic Agents,” says: —

“In connection with this subject it might be mentioned that, for years past, the name of Bellevue Hospital has been taken in vain by a number of persons and firms, without any authority whatever. It is a common occurrence that samples of proprietary medicines, foods, mineral waters, plasters, etc., etc. are sent to the hospital, or to members of the house-staff for ‘trial,’ whereupon the subsequent advertisements of the articles in question often assert that the latter are ‘used in Bellevue Hospital,’ leaving the impression upon the mind of the reader that the article, or articles, have been used with the sanction of some member of the Medical Board. It is probably impossible to find a remedy for this evil, from which many other institutions of repute likewise suffer. To publish a denial of such false assertions would only aggravate the evil. The utmost that can be done appears to be, to caution the medical staff against any entanglements with, or encouragement of, the agents of the interested parties.”

This report, which was adopted by the Medical Board of Bellevue Hospital, classifies proprietary preparations as “Objectionable” or “Unobjectionable” according to the following rules: —

“Unobjectionable preparations are those, the origin and composition of which is not kept secret, and which are known to serve a useful and legitimate purpose. Malted Milk is an example. Objectionable proprietary preparations, by far the largest group of the whole class, comprise all those which are aimed at under the medical code of ethics under the term ’secret nostrum,’ which term may be more closely defined thus:

“A secret nostrum is a preparation, the origin or composition of which is kept secret, the therapeutic claims for which are unreasonable or unscientific, or which is not intended for a legitimate purpose.

“Examples: The various ‘Soothing Syrups,’ ‘Female Regulators,’ ‘Blood Purifiers,’ and thousands of others.”

Dr. A. Emil Hiss, Ph. G., says of the secrecy of these preparations: —

“A secret compound with a meaningless title is presumptively a fraud. Why a secret if not to permit extravagant, or fraudulent, claims as to therapeutic merit? * * * * * The ruling motive of the secret being essentially false and dishonest, its employment in the interest of any remedy is clearly a sufficient cause for its condemnation and ostracism.”

Mothers sometimes wonder why their boys take so readily to cigarettes, or their daughters to cocaine, never thinking that the soothing syrup, or cough mixture given freely by themselves to their children developed a craving for something stronger later on. Mrs. Winslow’s Soothing Syrup, advertised for years in church as well as secular papers as “invaluable for children,” is cited in the report for 1888 of the Massachusetts State Board of Health as containing opium; also Ayer’s Cherry Pectoral, Dr. Bull’s Cough Syrup, Jayne’s Expectorant, Hooker’s Cough and Croup Syrup, Moore’s Essence of Life, Mother Bailey’s Quieting Syrup, and others too numerous to mention. The report says: —

“The sale of soothing syrups, and all medicines designed for the use of children, which contain opium and its preparations should be prohibited. Many would be deterred from using a preparation known to contain opium, who would use without question a soothing syrup recommended for teething children.”

Again, on page 149 the following is quoted from a prominent physician: —

“Among infants, and in the early years of life, soothing syrups are the cause of untold misery; for seeds are doubtlessly sown in infancy only to bear the most pernicious fruit in adult life. It is said that one of the best known soothing syrups contains from one to three grains of morphia to the ounce of syrup. I believe that stringent legal measures should immediately be taken to stop the sale of so-called soothing syrups containing opium, morphia or codeine.”

The writer has known mothers so ignorant of the nature of these soothing syrups as to deliberately put the baby to sleep upon them in order to insure relief from care for some hours.

Prof. J. Redding, M. D., says on this point: —

“While it may be true that an adult, of his own free will, and without incentive, or predisposing causes, does occasionally become a drunkard, I am convinced that nine hundred and ninety-nine out of every one thousand individuals who become drunkards are made so in embryo, infancy, or childhood, by the use of alcoholic decoctions, soothing syrups, opiates, calomel, etc. which are given as medicines to allay pain, obtund nerve sensibility, to cure the little sufferer of his vital manifestations, of his mental discomforts, but leave the actual disease and its, perhaps, putrid causation to time and debilitated vitality to remove.”

Of the danger and harmfulness of patent cough mixtures The American Therapist says: —

“Cough mixtures as a rule, do more harm than good. Nine times out of ten the principal ingredient is opium. It is true that opium may lessen the tendency to cough, but it does great damage by arresting the normal secretions, and the system becomes affected by the poisons from the kidneys, skin, stomach, intestines and the mucous membrane lining the upper air passages. Not only do these mixtures arrest every secretion in the body, but they also show their deteriorating and degrading effect through the stomach. They contain substances which tend to disorder and derange digestion.”

Several years ago the Post-Office Department at Washington was led to take an interest in the question of fraudulent “patent” medicines, and an examination of many of these nostrums was undertaken by government chemists. Fraud orders were issued against some of the most flagrant offenders, forbidding them the use of the mails. This has not done away with the evil, however, for they usually move to another city, and begin business again under another name.

The examinations made for the Post Office Department revealed the fact that a great many of the so-called medicines on the market were intoxicating beverages in disguise. The Internal Revenue Department then took up the matter and a long list of these beverage medicines was sent out to internal revenue agents with instructions that these must not be sold henceforth unless by persons paying a special tax for the sale of alcoholic beverages.

Some of the manufacturers of these nostrums availed themselves of opportunity given to add a recognized medicinal agent to their flavored alcohol and water and such preparations were stricken from the list of those requiring a whisky license for their sale. Peruna and Hostetter’s Bitters were the best-known of these. Peruna had been up to this time what government chemists called “a cheap cocktail.” The report of the pure food commissioner of North Dakota for 1906 gives on page 157 an analysis of it as now upon the market: “Alcohol by volume, 21.25 per cent.; total solids, 3.846 per cent.; ash,158 per cent.” The report says: —

“The only thing of a medicinal nature that we could find in this preparation appeared to be a small amount of senna combined with a bitters of some kind.”

Proprietary “Foods” have not escaped attention from chemists. Dr. Charles Harrington, for several years secretary of Massachusetts Board of Health, was the first to publish an analysis of these preparations showing their alcoholic strength and their small nutritive content. He lists “foods” examined by him as follows: —

“Liquid Peptonoids 23.03 alcohol; maximum amount recommended will yield less than one ounce of nutriment per day, and the equivalent of 3.50 oz. of whisky. Hemapeptone 10.60 alcohol; Hemaboloids 15.81 alcohol; the maximum dose recommended yields about ¼ oz. of nutriment, and the equivalent of about 1½ oz. of whisky daily. Tonic Beef 15.58 alcohol; doses recommended yield about ½ oz. nutriment daily, and the equivalent of one ounce of whiskey. Mulford’s Predigested Beef 19.72 alcohol; doses recommended yield about 1¼ oz. nutriment daily, and the alcoholic equivalent of about 6 oz. of whisky. There were “Foods” for the sick examined which were non-alcoholic, but their nutritive value was about nothing in comparison to their cost.”

The Committee on Pharmacy of the American Medical Association reports on the following foods thus: —

Carpanutrine 17.3 alcohol; Liquid Peptones (Lilly & Co.) 22.0; Nutrient Wine of Beef Peptone (Armour) 21.5; Nutritive Liquid Peptone 23.0; Panopepton 18.5; Peptonic Elixir 18.8; Tonic Beef 16.1. The report on these says: “There are no fatty substances present in these products; their food value from this point of view is, therefore, nil.”

A prominent physician of Philadelphia said of these “Foods” in the Journal of the A. M. A.: —

“I have long been convinced that many a patient has suffered severely when preparations such as these were being used, and that not a few of them have died, chiefly of starvation. * * * A very important disadvantage of these foods is their alcoholic content. Even in the small doses customarily used, the quantity of alcohol is often irritating to the stomach, and may be disadvantageous in other ways.”

The Committee on Pharmacy also reported on cod-liver oil preparations. They said: “A preparation claiming to represent cod-liver oil which does not contain oil in some form is fraudulent. Waterbury’s Metabolized Cod-Liver Oil and Hagee’s Cordial of Cod-Liver Oil are cited as examples. It is claimed by the manufacturers that the latter represents 33 per cent. of pure Norwegian cod-liver oil, but in neither of these preparations did the tests made by the committee show any oil. Analysis revealed sugar, alcohol, and glycerine, none of which is contained in cod-liver oil.”

Vinol is advertised as Wine of Cod-Liver Oil, but is admittedly without oil, and according to analysis contains 18.8 per cent. alcohol. Wampole’s Tasteless Preparation of Cod-Liver Oil showed 20.05 per cent. of alcohol.

Cod-Liver Oil is considerably out of date now as a prescribed remedy because physicians have found that it impairs appetite. Cream and fresh butter and olive oil are advised instead.

Australia has been such a harvest field for patent medicine manufacturers that a government commission was appointed to study the subject. This commission presented a voluminous report to the parliament of 1907. This report gives an analysis of most of the extensively advertised medicines. Doan’s Backache Kidney Pills are said to be made of oil of juniper 1 drop, hemlock pitch 10 grains, potassium nitrate 5 grains, powdered fenugreek (Greek hay) 4 grains, wheat flour 4 grains, maize starch 2 grains. The report says: “The stuff is the cheapest kind of skin-plaster made up into pills.” The seeds of fenugreek are used mainly for poultices. Doan’s Dinner Pills contain two drastic purgatives, podophyllin and aloin. Both of these are dangerous drugs. Aloin frequently produces hemorrhoids (piles). The British Medical Journal says that the material in forty of the Kidney Pills and four Dinner Pills would cost one English halfpenny (one cent).

Vitae-Ore is given as consisting of ordinary sulphate of iron (green vitriol) to which a little Epsom salts has been added. Munyon’s Kidney Cure, which claims to cure Bright’s disease, gravel, and all urinary diseases, is given as composed entirely of sugar. Dr. Williams’ Pink Pills are said to be an iron pill much the same as the ordinary Blaud’s Pills which are sold in drug-stores for half, or less than half, the price of the proprietary article. (Iron is said by recent investigators to be very injurious to the stomach.)

The Committee on Pharmacy of the American Medical Association has analyzed many proprietary medicines; from their reports the following analyses are taken. “Health Grains,” which are claimed to be a remedy for “Dyspepsia, Indigestion, Nervousness, etc.,” were found to consist of 87.50 per cent. of coarse quartz sand, and 12.50 per cent. of rock candy and syrup.

“Hoff’s Consumption Cure consists essentially of sodium cinnamate and extract of opium, a mixture at one time suggested for the treatment of tuberculosis, but which has been discarded by physicians. A medicine which depends on opium for whatever therapeutic effect it may have is, when sold indiscriminately to the laity, inherently vicious.”

Sartoin Skin Food for “sunburn, and all skin blemishes” was made of Epsom salts colored with a pink dye. The government prosecuted the company sending out Epsom salts as a “food,” and they were fined $20 for thus seeking to dupe silly women.

Malt extracts are very extensively used at the present time, under the popular notion that they are an aid to starch digestion. That they are a product of the brewery has caused them to be looked upon with suspicion by cautious people, but the multitude has apparently given no thought, or care, as to whether or not they may be alcoholic. Dr. Charles Harrington presented the results of an examination of these preparations at a meeting of the Boston Society of Medical Sciences, held Nov. 17, 1896. The following is quoted from the journal of the society for November, 1896: —

“Twenty-one different brands of liquid malt extract were obtained and analyzed. That they were not true malt extracts is shown by the fact that in no one was there the slightest diastatic power; all were alcoholic, some being stronger than beer, ale, or even porter. In a number of specimens a large amount of salicylic acid was detected.”

Dr. J. H. Kellogg, in commenting upon this report, said in the Dec., 1896, Bulletin of the A. M. T. A.: —

“In the light of these facts, it is apparent that ale or lager beer might as well be prescribed for a patient as these so-called malt extracts, which are practically nothing more than concentrated ale or lager.”

There are malt extracts, made up like honey, or syrup, in consistency, which are valuable.

The following list of malt extracts, with accompanying letter from Prof. Sharples, is taken from a paper published by Hon. Henry H. Faxon, of Quincy, Mass.: —

“Boston, Mass., March 20, 1897.

“I enclose a list of the malt extracts examined in this office during the past year or two. These samples were all in original packages, obtained by officers in various parts of Eastern Massachusetts. They probably very fairly represent the various malt extracts on the market. I have added two samples of Porter and one of Old Brown Stout for purposes of comparison.

“Yours respectfully,

“S. P. Sharples.

“State Assayer.”

Примечание 1⁵

The alcohol in the above table represents the cubic centimeters of alcohol in a 100 cubic centimeters of the liquid. The solids are the number of grams of solid extract in each 100 centimeters of the liquid.

S. P. Sharples.

The British Medical Journal, and the British Medical Temperance Review have been calling attention to the danger in coca wines. Intemperance among invalids is said to be greatly on the increase from the use of these wines. In every case the basis of these preparations is strongly alcoholic wine, ranging from 18 to 20 per cent. The coca added is either the leaves, or liquid extract of coca, or hydrochlorate of cocaine.