Index ~ Home

 

 

 

Quality Versus Quantity by John Uri LLoyd



Cincinnati, O.
* The demand for these articles has exhausted both the reprints and the
journals carrying the articles. The subjects are apparently so
important that we reprint the series, beginning: with this number of
the JOURNAL.EDITOR.

QUALITY VERSUS QUANTITY #I
Reprinted, 1931, from the Eclectic Medical Journal, March, 1914.

   October, 1909, I wrote an editorial titled "Strength versus Quality."
This briefly considered certain important phases of a problem that has
long been a feature of my study of plant products and educts, and which
in various directions have been voiced in times gone by in my lectures
on pharmacy and pharmaceutical chemistry. In order that this further
contribution ("Quality versus Quantity") to a very important subject be
connected with the editorial to which I refer, I reproduce the same, as
follows:   

   "Strength versus Quality.An error common to a superficial, as well
as to a one-sided or fragmentary conception of pharmacy, is that of
considering strength and quality as synonymous terms.  As we have said,
it is a common error, but it is one established by very high authority.
The truth is that, although more or less related, the constituent that
gives the factor strength is often less important than are the
attributes that go to make up quality, which, perhaps more than does
strength, leads to high excellence.

   "Let us define strength as a dominating something that stands out
boldly, and which, in toxic drugs, produces a violent or energetic
action, as does the poisonous something that produces death when an
overdose of a toxic drug is administered.  Let us define quality as a
balanced combination of other something, with just enough of the toxic
agent to make a complex product that, as a whole, has wider functions
than are possible if the single death-dealing substance dominates. But
we need not confine ourselves to toxic drugs, for, from all time, in
many familiar directions, such as tea, coffee, spices, tobacco,etc.,
standards of strength have been differentiated from those of quality.

   "For example, the strength of wine lies in its alcoholic proportion,
but the quality of wine depends on the attributes imparted by
accompanying congeners, such as water, potassium salts, ethers, acids,
tannates and such.  These, if balanced, the one in proportion to the
other, produce wine of varying qualities.  Indeed, no less an authority
than Solomon drew a fine line when he excluded the red tannates: 'Look
not upon the wine when it is red.'

   "The dominating, poisonous agent in nux vomica is a strychnine
compound, and on this substance rests the official (U. S. P.) strength
of the drug.  But nux vomica contains other alkaloidal structures and
essential oils, as well as other organic complexities, which, balanced
in Eclectic pharmacy and thus used in Eclectic therapy, are necessary
to the quality of the Eclectic nux vomica.  In the standardizing of nux
vomica, the U. S. Pharmacopeia recognizes strychnine only, whilst the
Eclectic physician considers strychnine, in undue proportion,
objectionable in that it dangerously overbalances quality.

   "In like manner,the poisonous strength of podophyllum root is, by
such authority, due to its resin; of belladonna, to its structural
atropine; of aconite, to its structural aconitine; of hydrastis, to its
structural hydrastine; and of jalap to its structural resin, etc., etc.
 In all these, and in others similar, the Eclectic depends on no such
standards, but places quality, not strength, foremost.

   "Nor is a standard of strength difficult to attain, whereas that of
excellence, based on quality, is too often vainly sought, or
reprehensibly neglected.  It is easy,and not, as a rule, expensive, to
double or treble the amount of the strength principle of a compound in
which the congeneric substances that make for quality are elusive.  A
boy can add an ounce of alcohol to a pint of wine, and thus, for a few
cents, double its strength, but a vintage of exceptional quality, with
less alcoholic strength, commands a price far above that of pure
alcohol.  A novice in pharmacy can add seventy grains of strychnine to
a U.S.P. fluid extract of nux vomica, and thus double its pharmacopeial
strength.  An apprentice in pharmacy can, from dried root of gelsemium,
make a preparation very poisonous by excess of the alkaloids, but yet
very deficient in quality as contrasted with a preparation of the
recent root of less alkaloidal strength.

   "In our opinion, the attempt to standardize a preparation by a single
dominating constituent is but a struggle towards a pharmaceutical
standard of excellence, in which therapeutic quality should be the
ideal.  This fact Eclectic physicians have recognized for more than
half a century.LLOYD, E. M. JOURNAL, October, 1909.
 * * * *
   With the above before us, a further step may well take our further
thought in the direction of quality in contradistinction to quantity as
applied to therapy.  And it much pleases us all to appreciate that not
alone the physician, the pharmacist and the manufacturer, but the
purely scientific chemist as well, is now directing his careful
attention upon this problem, whose outreaching possibilities uprise
before us all.  And to me, particularly, comes the pleasant reflection
that, with the extension of thought in these directions, arises
naturally a liberality of action in opponents of other days, in which
the old-style resistance to pharmaceutical investigation in outside
lines is fast being relinquished.  And, strange as it may seem, this
toleration, now extended toward the "irregular" and his empirical
works, is bred of pure scientific thought and investigation.

   Chief among the factors of this liberation of good men from prejudice
is the new chemistry known as "Colloidal Chemistry."  In this "new
chemistry" the best minds of the world are now studying, although the
foundation of the work laid by Graham in the beginning of the last
century has been constantly augmented by others in the passing along.

   But, it may be asked, what has this to do with our subject? To such
a question I would reply, "Everything!"  Colloidal chemistry is based
upon the fact that quantity is but one factor in many directions that
involve both chemical andtherapeutic action.  The condition of a
substance is a mighty factor as concerns its action as a thing, and
necessarily, in this case, becomes a dominating agent in its
therapeutic application.  But even this is not new.  Did not the United
States Dispensatory record, fifty years ago, that six ounces of mercury
swallowed by a man with suicidal intent produced no appreciable action
of mercury, whereas,a few grains of mercury, finely divided, forms the
active agent, blue mass.  The first recorded dose of resin of
podophyllum was a lump of resin as large as the first joint of the
thumb, and from this the patient recovered.  Had the remedy been
triturated to a fine division it is safe to say that no human being
could have withstood even a portion of that heroic dose. Physicians
comprehend full well the increased activity of subdivided substances,
such as mineral salts and resins. The works of clinical observers, such
as Webster, Scudder, Ellingwood, Fyfe, Felter, Thomas and others of our
school, testify to this fact, whilst every page of any work devoted to
Homeopathic therapy teems with living examples.

   And yet such powders as these do not comprehend, other than in very
minute traces, colloidal dispersion.  In these triturates physical
division prevails.  Colloidal ultimates are practically unreached. And
yet so marked is the energetic increase of triturated drugs as to have
established the fact of their intrinsic values in clinical therapy
beyond the shadow of a doubt.  The quality of a drug depends not alone
on the weight of the materials; its physical condition is
all-important. With this thought in mind, consider how physicians of
all schools direct their prescription mixtures of dry drugs to be made
into "a fine powder."  Note how desirable are the triturates of milk
sugar with a selected salt or resin.

   And yet we have not as yet reached colloidal structures that stand
in liquids without settling, that pass through the filter paper, that
are so finely dispersed as to even receive the name, "colloidal
solutions."

   Let me repeat that a consideration of such as this is not new to
those who, in times gone by, have honored me by listening to my
lectures.  Although the experiments of Graham were used as texts for
definitions, we together passed into outreaches that surely will make
familiar to those who listened in those days the principles of
"colloidal activity," now looming up as a mighty factor in the
evolution of medicine, and which is liberating from bondage the man who
believes that quality is necessarily dependent on quantity, that the
factors that confront the pharmacist are to be fully explained by
symbols, formulae and equations.


QUALITY VERSUS QUANTITYII.
JOHN URI LLOYD, CINCINNATI, O.
Reprinted, 1931, from the Eclectic Medical Journal, April, 1914

   Let me take as my text a sentence that reads as follows, from the
article in the February number of the ECLECTIC MEDICAL JOURNAL: The
quality of a drug depends not alone on the weight of the materials; its
physical condition is all-important."

   Then let me ask that this be connected with my continuous
contributions in the direction of plant pharmacy, in which, during the
past forty years, one line of thought has been persistently presented
to my readers, this being in turn threaded by a continuous line of
self-questioning.  The kernel of it all has, however, been to the
effect that plant pharmacy is not a superficial prob lem, but a mighty
study, based on the art of natural structural aggregations that exist
in plant complexities, the art of the chemist being largely restricted
to the destruction of these natural structures, together with the study
and description of the factors evolved there from.  I have continually
urged the utilization of neutral solvents designed to liberate and to
separate structural entities that are so easily affected by heroic
chemistry, be it of any form ordescription.  I have been irresistibly
forced, with increasing evidences before me, to conclude that the art
of pharmacy in the direction of plant complexities is the reverse of
the art of the applied chemical processes of the past.  It must,
however, be recognized that the pharmacist has privileges in recognized
chemical channels, and that the chemist cannot ignore many of the
factors embraced in the term "pharmaceutical compounds."

   The pharmacist's province in plant structures seems thus to me,
primarily, the investigation and preservation of the qualities of
natural associates that need be preserved as such, and differentiated
from each other, with the aim of utilizing those that are useful. The
art of the chemist seems to be that of applying destructive processes
to plant structures, by means of such reagents as acids and alkalies,
and by such processes obtaining from these structures ultimates that
are definite entities in themselves, usually crystalline, and that can
be graphically pictured by means of symbols expressing their atomic
composition, and even their molecular arrangement.

   Whilst I did not in the least underrate the field of the chemist, and
the great work that the chemist accomplished in these directions, I
considered that the field of the pharmacist, with his undefined
"compounds," offers a legitimate phase of scientific research of no
less importance.  I have, therefore, accepted, as voiced in all my
writings since 1879, that a duty of the pharmacist is that of studying
undefined combinations in which no chemical equivalents are possible. 
These aggregate masses ofmaterials are, in their vegetable host, dove-
tailed together into balanced structures, each possessed of individual-
ities of its own, but united with and interlaced with others, physical attractions between groups being a conspicuous factor.  Such compounds
serve either as nutrients to conserve animal life, or as definite
therapeutic agents to be utilized for the correction of abnormal
conditions in disease expression.  These symbolless structures of "pharmaceutical compounds" are, as a rule, non-crystalline, amorphous
and shapeless, in the fresh plant, remaining colloidal when dried, if decomposition does not (create) liberate crystalline products.

   But this shapelessness, due to colloidal condition, does not in the
least detract from their activity or usefulness.  Shapeless bodies, as
yet outside the realm of systematic chemical equations, may possess
most pronounced toxic qualities, or be of special nutritive value. The
most active resins, the vegetable astringents and acrid gums, the toxic
"extractives," are examples of such as these.  These many years ago I
even presumed to argue that the most pronounced forms of animal food
products are these elusive colloidal combinations, and not the chemical
ultimates that may be broken there from, and that the therapeutically
helpful, the physiologically active, the nutritive structures of
vegetation, are likewise non-crystalline, colloidal bodies.  These
arguments, however, are familiar and need not be referred to here, an
example of this line of thought being the paper contributed by me to
the semi-annual meeting of the American Pharmaceutical Association,
1902, titled "Organized Water as a Food."

   More than once have I felt somewhat humiliated over the seeming
neglect by my friends of the outreaches offered the student in pharmacy
through investigations in these directions, which appeared to me to be
no less scientific as a study, and no less helpful in the evolution of
a perfected pharmacy, than are those of the chemist, who, by shattering
natural combinations and picking out isolated fragments made thereby,
is accomplishing a work of unquestioned scientific value, as well as of
great therapeutic usefulness.

   With the foregoing as an introduction, may I not in this paper, which
is designed as a second contribution under the title that heads the
article, refer to a paper written by me in 1890, at the request of
Dr.Charles Rice and Dr. Fred Hoffman, and read by me before the New
York College ofPharmacy?  In this connection it may not be out of place
for me to say, furthermore, that that paper was presented with
misgivings, not because I feared that I was materially wrong in any of
the premises, but because I felt that I stood practically alone in my
pleading for the scientific opportunity of the student involved in
plant pharmacy. I felt that, under the trend of the ideals of those
involved in chemical pharmacy, my plea for recognition, based upon the
arguments presented, might be considered in an unfriendly manner by my
hearers.  This, even though my intent was of the kindliest, and my
offered examples such as I believed should be accepted, even by those
wrapped up in other lines ofresearch.

   Both Dr. Hoffman and Dr. Rice reviewed the paper before its
presentation to the society, and each insisted that it needed no change
whatever in either argument or the examples cited.  And thus the
address, "Infinities in Pharmacy,"was delivered a quarter of a century
ago.  Let us now connect with the present paper a few of the problems
then presented. As concerns the simplest of living plants, it was then
stated:

   "Painful as the admission may be, we stand dumb before the mystery
of the simplest plant, in its living entirety.  And when we turn to its
crude fragmentsas gums, resins, barks, leaves, etc.we have scarce the
first clue to their true relationships.  Or, when at last we crush this
thing of life that refuses to deliver its secrets, and obtain by
certain processes alkaloids, glucosides, oils, starches, sugars, acids,
tannins, and other substances, all of which are more or less related
and dependent one upon the other, yet we know not what infinity of
other results is possible to other forms of manipulation."

   With this thought in mind, the pharmacist was contrasted with the
chemist, somewhat as a dealer in living animals might be contrasted
with him who deals in the flesh of animals.

   "Nor, while the different parts of the same plant are so divergent
in their affinities, are we prepared to deny unperceived affinities in
different plants?  The spots on the distant sun may produce
meteorological disturbances in an area of our globe that would not
respond to the wildest commotions in another portionof the same globe.

   "But in this Holy of Holies we dare not attempt to lift the veil.
Leaving its awful arcana undisturbed we turn to consider plant
disturbances as they come to us when the life has fled; for, as the
butcher deals in flesh, not in animals, so the pharmacist deals with
vegetable remains, not with the plants themselves."

   Comes now a plea for further light, the argument being that no
product or educt made by destruction of a plant structure had, in its
living function, been thoroughly comprehended by the investigator:

   "I doubt if any thorough pharmacist, whatever his accomplishments,
is today satisfied with a single plant examination that is recorded."

   The next sentence asks if any plant of the many hundred thousands
known had been exhausted by the world's chemists and pharmacists, as
regards its phyto-chemical mysteries:

   "Is there in this world a plant that has been exhausted of its
material and its connected phyto-chemical mysteries?  Every page of
your dispensatory is vocal with pleas for light, further light.  Your
pharmacopeia has been rewritten again and again, and is now woefully
imperfect.  Its pages do not bear record of a single crude vegetable
structure in which the inner unknown does not merge into and envelop
the known, and usually there is so little of the known that the crude
drug is considered as an entirety, the committee of revision of the
pharmacopeia not venturing the attempt to mention the several
constituents of the drug."

   Passing next to two drugs to which, perhaps, more scientific effort
had been directed than to any others known, the question was asked:

   "Select an example from among the vegetable drugs that have been
longest recognized as therapeutical agents, and first developed in
regard to proximate constituents.  Naturally, opium is named (a product
only), or perhaps cinchona is preferred as the more important.  Each
has been subjected to lifetimes of conscientious investigation, but are
not talented specialists, with the focused light of all these years of
investigation before them, still searching into their mysteries?  Are
they not severally shrouded in the mist of that pharmaceutical infinity
which embraces the domains of molecular and atomic space, those
unfathomed depths of molecular motions that, under the influence of
plant vitalities, produce substances which in themselves are perhaps
marvels of simplicity, on the one hand, and of equal complexity on the
other ?"

   Then, with the eye focused upon the questions of the investigators
who have devoted their lives in such directions, a plea is made for the
men involved in such complexities, the sentence ending with the
question, "Are we sure that theconditions in which any of even the best
known alkaloids naturally cxist areknown ?"

   "We should not underestimate the achievements of the unremitting
toilers who have freely given their lives to these investigations, men
now with us and those who have gone before; but no man can be injured
by comparing his work with Omnipotence, and probably I do not go beyond
many when I say that the natural plant conditions of such presumably
well-known alkaloids as morphine and quinine are today shrouded in
obscurity, for some of us cannot concede that we have learned even the
interstructural associations or combinations of these labor-ridden
substances.  Are we sure that the conditions in which any of the best
known alkaloids naturally exist are known?"

With thought directed to the alkaloids, which have, perhaps, dominated
the efforts of the chemist in the direction of plant educts, a question
is asked that, even now, after twenty-five years have passed, may still
stand as a question:

   "And I may perhaps venture to raise the question, do we know that
alkaloids undeniably exist in plants as the simple salts of acids,
purely as direct acid compounds?  Facts innumerable connected with the
simplest of plant organizations,which this age may not bring to light,
are surely veiled in these directions."

   Comes now a plea for the investigators to follow an optimistic
looking forward to the future.  And, in this plea, and in this forward
look, I ventured to hope that the pharmacist of the future might
restrict his field of effort, with due respect to the analytical as
well as the constructive chemist, with toleration for the errors that
have been made by the experimental pharmacist, and with due credit for
that which he gave to those who followed.  The field of a pharmacist's
study must be in restricted lines if he hopes to accomplish.  He must
not attempt to conquer a multitude of problems. Let me quote:

   "Such reflections, perhaps, are more likely to come over the workers
in pharmaceutical plant research after they have passed their period of
usefulness; but probably if one could follow another in the study of a
single genus ofplants, the magnitude of the field is such that the
third and fourth generationswould see good reason to restrict
themselves to still narrower confines.  With due respect, therefore, to
our workers of the past and present, it seems to me that elaboration of
the ground already gone over in plant examination is the great and
pressing demand of this day, and that this service is not of less
importance to phyto-chemists than the mapping of the so-called known
heavens is to astronomers."

   Let such reflections as these be further recorded in the language
in which they were then written:

   "As a further step in this line of thoughtfor I have as yet
considered and referred to drugs of vegetable origin only that have
been longest recognized and are best knownlet us enumerate, beside the
plants that men have attempted to investigate, those untouched by the
chemist, and which have never been studied and are not even mentioned
in our records.  We find that those we have examined are so
insignificant in numbers as to scarce justify mention.  The little
group so imperfectly known to us is counterbalanced by multitudes of
species, of which there are numberless varieties.  The botanist is yet
discovering species, yet formulating names, nor will this labor end
during our generation.  We have not yet become familiar with the bare
names of the plants he has recorded, and so light is his work compared
with our own that he has but to grasp a flowering branch, describe the
connections, relationships and name it according to a system, to
complete his task.  Comparatively, this is a small work, and yet today
the botanist is crying in despair at the problem of species and
sub-species determination, of which the American field alone presents
innumerable difficulties.  Before the American flora can be considered
phyto-chemically, even as superficially as our work has been done to
this day with a few plants, ages will have elapsed, and the names of
men now foremost in the ranks will perhaps have passed from
recollection.  A few dozen only of American species, more or less
(usually more) imperfectly, have passed under the immature methods now
known to the analyst; while east of the Mississippi River alone we have
doubtless ten thousand distinct flowering plants.  Add to these the
flora of the great west, the untold product of South America, Asia,
Europe, Africa, Australia, and the islands of the seas, and we cannot
but shrink before the contrast with these unexplored wilds of the
little that we know.  Thousands of square miles of primeval forests,
dense jungles and grassy pampas, which form blank spaces on our maps,
await the tread of civilized man.  These wastes are unknown to the very
explorer; the botanist has not yet set foot in these voids, and we have
seen how far the botanist even now outstrips the phyto-chemist.  Even
as I pen these words there comes (in public print) a cablegram from the
explorer, Stanley, a man for two years lost to sight in the 'Dark
Continent':
   " 'All the stretch of country between Yamuga and this place was an
    absolutely new country.  The darkest region of the earth, it is one
    great, compact, remorselessly sullen forest, the growth of an untold
    number of ages.'      (Signed) HENRY M. STANLEY.

"That wilderness has closed upon and absorbed this single thread of
light, yet it must be part of the conquests of the pharmacy of the
future."

   With all this before us, the question may now be asked, "What is the
connection between the title that heads this article and that of the
paper from which these quotations have been made?"  Furthermore, "What
concern has the physician in the bringing before him of pharmaceutical
problems that need, in the opinion of some persons, be the care only of
the maker of medicines ?"  To these queries I will reply that I feel
assured that the physicians who read this journal, and to whom my
papers on pharmacy and connected subjects have, for over a generation,
been successively presented, will fully comprehend the connection
between that which is presented in this paper and my precedingpaper in
the February JOURNAL, and that they are likewise in a position to link
the two with the paper that will follow.

   We are now surely upon the threshold of a proper recognition of
structure-less pharmacy.  We have reached the "breaking dawn" of the
pharmacist's opportunities.  Contact action, mass action and colloidal
qualities of both structureless structures and minute fragments (not
atoms) of dispersed compounds and elements must be a scientific and
recognized part of the most advanced chemico-pharmacal field now
looming before us under the name of colloidal chemistry.


QUALITY VERSUS QUANTITYIII.
JOHN URI LLOYD, CINCINNATI, O.
Reprinted, 1931, from the Eclectic Medical Journal, May, 1914.

   The preceding (two) papers consider in a general way the problem of
plant structures, the aim being to suggest that to ignore natural
structures is to neglect an opportunity in pharmacy.  That whilst the
ultimates broken out of structures are of value in therapy, the
structures yielding the ultimates are possessed of qualities that in
many directions make them superior to the artificial products.

   It may be reasoned, also, and very consistently, that to dispossess
a natural drug texture of its colloidal qualities is to alter its
condition otherwise than physically.  In this we believe, and in this
direction we believe the art of pharmacy will yet evolve until its
recognized importance will be established to all concerned in both
chemistry and therapy.

   Let us again repeat that in such as this no reflection is placed on
either the analytical or synthetical chemist.  Upon the contrary, we
believe that the time will come when chemistry will recognize the fact
that the beginning of the study is the consideration of such problems
as may be expressed by formulae.  In a time to come will also follow a
scientific comprehension of the pharmacist's structures now beyond the
eye of the talented men engaged in the study of the products broken out
of these, as yet, voidless and formless colloidal bodies.

   With these remarks as a text, it may be well for this writer to
extract a few phrases bearing on this subject from past prints from his
pen. (See Lloyd Brothers' DrugTreatises, 1904 to 1914).


JABORANDI ( 1904).
   Constituents.As might be expected, the chemistry of 'jaborandi' is
in a chaotic condition. The one conspicuous product is the alkaloid
pilocarpine (discovered independently, 1875, by E. Hardy, in France,
and A. W. Gerrard, in England), but this is one constituent only, for a
number of fortifying or modifying acids and bases are to be obtained
from, or are present in, the plant.  Practitioners of medicine know
from experience that a preparation of true Pilocarpus microphyllus
carries qualities distinct from those of the alkaloid, which, in
itself, as found in commerce, is not necessarily a uniform agent and,
as is shown by the melting points, as well as by observation of the
substances obtained under the name pilocarpine from different species
of plants, must be taken with much discriminative allowance.  A
qualified student of materia medica can distinguish the official leaf
and fairly judge of its condition (no pharmacist need ask an excuse for
not knowing the true drug), but yet few can draw alkaloidal
distinctions between the alkaloidal products of the various species,
which, indeed, remain yet to be studied.  The most abundant spurious
drug (Pilocarpus Trachylopus) yields an alkaloid that is worse than
useless, because it is antagonistic to the principal alkaloid of the
official leaf, few being familiar with the chemical distinctions. The
so-called active principles of the Jaborandis embrace the alkaloids
jaborine, pilocarpidine, jaboridline, jabonine, and the acids jaboric
and pilocarpic, as well as other products and educts, among which is
potassium nitrate, obtained by us in crystals.  The chemistry of these
Jaborandi bodies is enough, almost, to take the life study of a
specialist, and the distinctions and relationships of these products in
natural association, or as separate products, are not less an enigma
than are the structures themselves.


VERATRUM ( 1904).
   "Constituents and Products.No constituent representing the full
therapeutical qualities of Veratrum has been obtained from the drug.
Chemistry, as is true of most other plants, destroys, creates and
alters, but does not parallel.  Structural relationships that exist in
the drug may be broken, new substances created, but the natural balance
is not maintained by any educt, product or mixture of ultimates.  A
fallacy is it to even hope that test-tube juggling and heroic chemistry
have broken out of Veratrum an educt or product to replace a
preparation that represents the interstructural ultimates of Veratrum
as nature made them and combined them, and on which the entire therapy
of the drug has been established.  Thirty years ago, when the writer
was enthusiastic in the belief that chemical methods could isolate from
plants their qualities, and in alkaloidal form could put their virtues
into small compass, the study of Veratrum and its irrevocable lesson to
the contrary was one of the shocks that came with irresistible force to
dispel the illusion.  No constituent or created product represented
Veratrum.  All the alkaloidal fragments broken out, these so-called
derivatives mixed together, are not Veratrum either in structural
composition or in therapeutic value.  Separated, they are fallacies;
antagonistic are they in their actions.  Mixed, they are frauds if
viewed as representing the full drug.  Let us chiefly consider the
record of these questionable Veratrum alkaloids:

   "In 1835 Osgood attempted, without success, to discover the active
principlesof Veratrum.  Mitchell (1837) also failed, but in 1857
Richardson found a bitter alkaloid that he considered veratrine.  In
1865 Charles Bullock broke out a resin and two alkaloids which he named
veratroidia and viridia.  In 1874 Mitchell announced that viridia was
jervine, once called barytine, and in 1876 Bullock announced that his
so-called veratroidia (discovered 1865) was impure jervine, asserting
now that jervine was the only alkaloid obtainable from Veratrum viride.

   In 1876 Wormley proved to his own satisfaction that veratrine is
obtained, which was again denied (1877) by Robbins.  In 1878 Wright and
Luff described five alkaloids, jervine, pseudojervine, rubijervine,
veratralbine, veratrine  and cevadine, the last in amount greater than
the total of all the others. In 1890 Pehkschen obtained principally
jervine, with small amounts of veratroidine.

   "Thus discord reigns, and as long as different men with different
chemicals heroically attack the drug discord is likely to continue.  In
our opinion, these broken out fragments are chemically made derivatives
of Veratrum structure, not natural integral parts.  The total mixed
alkaloidal product of Veratrum viride's interstructural unknowns will
no more give the therapeutical action of Veratrum than will the
alkaloidal unknowns and various products masquerading under the name
aconitine give the full therapeutical effects of aconite, or the
chemical ultimates of ergot replace that drug.  The less chemistry
Veratrum receives the better; no acid or alkali can be tolerated.  The
kindly touch of natural solvents, without other than the momentary
touch of heat, is absolutely necessary to the production of a
representative pharmaceutical preparation.


CHIONANTHUS ( 1904).
   "The taste of Chionanthus bark is bitter, and, dominated by the odor,
gives a very characteristic flavor when the bark is chewed.  No
analysis of the bark has been made, attempts to do so having failed for
obvious reasons.  Mr. R. S. Justice thought to have identified saponin,
which Mr. W. von Schulz disputed, in his turn announcing a glucoside.
The fact is, the most tender touches of chemistry disrupt the drug,
which is so sensitive that its alcoholic tinctures and fluidextracts
often disintegrate and fly into unknown products even when kept in the
cold.  No known separated constituent gives the energy of Chionanthus.
The so-called Chionanthin of early Eclecticism was intended to be a
mixture of about everything the drug afforded.  In its production,
heat, desiccation and heroic destructive manipulation brushed the life
out of the drug, the product, a so-called concentration or resinoid of
the resinoid and alkaloid craze of Eclecticism's infancy, being
practically valueless.  The writer of this paper has made a systematic
study of Chionanthus for twenty-five years.  It has been to him a
perplexing problem, one of the most exasperating in some regards of all
the materia medica drugs.  The experimental details of this work would
fill a volume.  Be it enough to state that as a conclusion we believe
the only possible therapeutical representative of the bark to be a
liquid pharmaceutical preparation. Practically no heat, no chemistry,
no heroic disruption methods, no acid nor alkaline solvents, can be
employed in its production.


NUX VOMICA ( 1904).
   Composition.The dominating constituent of Nux Vomica is a complex
compound which, in natural form, is an invaluable remedy.  By means of
chemical reagents it can be split into parts, embracing two intensely
poisonous alkaloidal products, a glucoside and acids. These alkaloids
are strychnine, brucine, and perhaps igasurine (yet in doubt).  The
main acid is igasuric acid, while the glucoside is named loganin.
These are all colorless bodies, the alkaloids being very bitter and
energetically poisonous, brucine being a poison similar to strychnine,
acting with less violence and more slowly, but not less surely, than
strychnine.


COLLINSONIA ( 1904).
   Constituents.Collinsonia parallels other vegetable products that
as a whole are useful, but in which the isolated structural fragments
are not the equivalent of the drug.  No definite therapeutical agent
has ever been identified in Collinsonia or obtained from it.  Mr.
Lochman (1885) obtained resin, starch, tannin and wax from the plant,
mucilage from the root, and traces of a volatile oil from the leaves,
but nothing outside the usual constituents of plants.  No alkaloid,
essential oil, glucoside or vegetable acid carrying even an
individuality of its own, has been picked out of the drug.  In this it
differs from Veratrum viride (see Drug Study No. IV), which is such a
mine of richness to the chemical juggler, yielding a multitude of
questionable and mysterious educts.  Nor, by reason of its insipidity
and its lack of odor, can Collinsonia be classed with such drugs as
Chionanthus, which, although devoid of chemical equivalents, is yet
possessed of strong sensible qualities both of taste and smell.
Collinsonia, like Ergot, and most other vegetable remedies is most
valuable either as a whole or in preparations carrying its united
qualities. No chemistry, no heroic pharmacy can be tolerated in its
manipulation.


MACROTYS (Cimicifuga)( 1905).
   Constituents.Macrotys, like other American drugs, has been
persistently and repeatedly attacked by chemists, beginning with Mears
(1827), passing thence to Tilghman (1834), King (1835), Davis (1861),
Conrad (1871), L. S. Beach (1876), Trimble (1878), Falck (1884), Warder
(1884), and others, both contemporary with and following those named
above.  All authorities subsequent to King unite in saying that the
most conspicuous product of Macrotys' disintegration is a compound
resinous body, which was first discovered by Dr. John King in 1835.
Subsequent studies have been largely devoted to the splitting of this
resin into by-products, none of which as nearly represents Macrotys as
does the so-called resin, which is, in itself, a complex mixture of
bodies.  Some of these resinous bodies exist, possibly, in a natural
condition in the drug, but the majority are created by drying,
chemistry and manipulation.  In this connection let us say that so
delicate is the structure of this drug, Macrotys, that even the touch
of the atmosphere, as well as manipulation by means of solvents and
subsequent drying, are sufficient to produce great changes, and result
in newly constructed products.


GELSEMIUM (1904).
   All this problematic chemistry of Gelsemium products is, however, a
matter of indifference to the physicain desiring a balanced
representative preparation of Gelsemium, partly because the
questionable basic products on record, as well as the resin and
extractives, are obtained from the dry root and not from the green.
None of them carries the qualities of the preparations of Gelsemium
that have made the therapeutical reputation of the drug.  If the drying
process did not break the natural interstructural combination, the
heroic chemistry used in splitting it into fragments would accomplish
that result.  These alkaloids and other products are obtained from
Gelsemium, but we neither comprehend how they have been created nor
what their natural relationships may be, nor yet the part they bear to
the host that gives them birth, and which, as a whole, is so sensitive
as to forbid even the process of drying, if one wishes the fullest and
finest qualitics of Gelsemium.


BELLADONNA AND SCOPOLAMINE (1905) .
   Their alkaloidal constituents are naturally the subject of much
controversy, both in themselves and when contrasted with those of
Belladonna, and, in our opinion, are likely to remain so as long as
different chemists, with different chemicals, are attacking a structure
that, under various influences, yields varying products.  For example,
Scopolamine, which was first asserted to be the characteristic alkaloid
of the drug, was considered by E. Schmidt to be identical with
Hyoscine.  O. Hesse next found it to consist of two alkaloids, Hyoscine
and Altroscine, and, next, Schmidt proved to his own satisfaction that
Hyoscine was a mixture of Scopolamine and some other body, finally
asserting that Hyoscine does not exist.  The facts are, the broken-out
fragments of these natural drug structures are interesting, and chiefly
so because of the opportunity they give investigators to puzzle
themselves and others over artificially made products, whose qualities,
changing under the influence of chemical reagents or atmospheric
action, remind one of the chameleon.


DIOSCOREA ( 1905).
   Constituents.Excepting saponin, obtained in 1885 by Mr. W. C.
Kalteyer, there are no representive educts or products of Dioscorea of
a definite chemical structure.  The drug has been attacked by
enthusiasts in destructive chernistry, but the ultimates of their
antagonistic processes are of no value whatever in therapy.  In the
early days of Eclecticism, close following the discovery of the Resin
of Podophyllum by Dr. King, attempts were made to obtain by a similar
process an energetic principle from Dioscorea.  The product was called Dioscorein, and on faith was accepted for a considerable time, in the
alkaloid-resinoid-concentration craze of Eclecticism, as a worthy
companion of King's energetic Resin of Podophyllum.  It was a very
inferior saponin, and, naturally, did not stand the test of time.


PODOPHYLLUM ( 1907 ).
   The destructive chemist next turned his attention towards
dissociating this resinous substance. By various methods several
decomposition products were announced, such as Podophyllotoxin,
Picropodophyllin, Picropodophyllic Acid, etc.  These are all more or
less energetic, but all are faulty, none being as reliable as the
natural resinous precipitate.  All attempts to force these artificial
products on physicians have failed, for the very good reason that none
ofthem equals the original drug.


SCUTELLARIA ( 1908 ).
   Constituents, or Decomposition Products.As in attempts to locate the
structural ultimates of other plants in which a drug as a whole, not
the fragment, plays a part, so have the efforts of the chemist failed
in Scutellaria.  In 1824 Cadet made an analysis of the drug,
describing, among other usual constituents of plants, a peculiar
volatile oil, and a bitter principle which seemed to be peculiar to the
drug.  In 1877 Howard decided that the volatile oil was the
characteristic principle, but this exists in very minute amount.  In
1889 Myers and Gillespie obtained the usual drug products, and also, in
the form of stellar crystals, a decided amount of Cadet's bitter
substance, which proved to be glucoside.

   To sum it all up, in our opinion these chemists severally destroyed
the plant, and from the products of disintegration obtained certain
ultimates that may or may not exist in the plant tissue, and likewise
may or may not, singly or collectively, have any decided therapeutical
connection with the drug's structural qualities.


SPONGIA ( 1911 ).
   Constituents.Burnt Sponge contains a large amount of combined
iodine, not merely a 'trace,' as Christison states.  In addition,
bromine, phosphorus, sulphur and other elements in unknown combinations
go to make up Burnt Sponge.  Whoever reasons concerning the action of
compounds made up of such substances as unknown combinations of the
elements that theoretically may be formulated into chloride of sodium,
calcium sulphate, sodium iodide, magnesium bromide, calcium carbonate,
calcium phosphate, magnesium and iron oxides, unknown sulphides and
phosphates reorganized from organic tissue and reconstructed by heat
from complex organic bodies, presumes much in asserting that such
combinations depend solely for their qualities upon a single substance
that may, by destructive chemical processes, be isolated from the
original product.  The intermolecular constitution of Burnt Sponge is
today unknown, and the part iodine takes in the therapy of that
substance is also unknown.

   Let us repeat that, in our opinion, the balanced structure, a
complexity in itself, that results in the empirical production of the
compound known as Burnt Sponge, cannot be molecularly established by
any theoretical computation made from a review of the isolated
constituents thereof.  Consequently, the uses of this preparation by
physicians who employ it in contradistinction to iodine or its
compounds, are accepted as logically applying to a structural
something, molecularly unknown, that must be very different from
iodine, or a single iodine compound.


DIGITALIS ( 1913) .
   . . . From 1874 to the present date thousands of chemists have sought
the secrets of Digitalis, all ignoring the natural combinations of
organics and inorganics, all seeking a toxic agent as the desirable
therapeutic constituent, and all, so far as we can discover, believing
that agent to be organic only.  Seemingly in it all, natural
associations of textural relationship of the organic and inorganic are
ignored.  First destroy the natural substance of the drug, then from it
create anew, is the idealistic process, which needs no other comment
than that, after more than one hundred years of these aggressive
destructive methods by the most brilliant chemists, the verdict is by
many persons accepted, as by Thompson in 1811, 'still unknown.' "

* * * *

   The foregoing excerpts are fairly indicative of the views of this
writer concerning the subject of relationships between plant structures
and chemical products created therefrom.  Whilst there is no question
concerning the value of such ultimates as the broken out alkaloids and
glucosides, or of such elements as iodine that can be produced by the
destruction of sponge, and even from animal structures such as the
thyroid gland, this writer believes that neither the alkaloid nor an
element such as iodine parallels the colloidal structures from which
they are made.  Resin of podophyllum is not podophyllum, emetine is not
ipecac, iodine is neither thyroid nor sponge.  Give to the evolving
chemist and his products a full modicum of credit for his great
services and accomplishments, but do not take from the pharmacist his
birthright, the study of structural bodies, concerning which we have as
yet neither molecular knowledge nor symbolic possibilities.  Let us sum
this phase of the subject up by an extract from a drug treatise (1909)
on "Dried Fragments of Drugs Are Not Representative of Drugs.

   "An experience of more than three decades, commencing in a craze for
energetic, or even poisonous, proximate principles, had, as already
related,taught Eclectic physicians to their own satisfaction that a
toxic constituent or a mixture of the separated dried products broken
out of a drug by chemical means or created from drugs by the chemist's
art, useful though each might be in its own sphere, did not typify or
parallel the therapeutic qualities of the whole drug.  They had learned
by bitter experience that a poisonous fragment or ultimate, broken out
of or created from a plant by chemistry, did not represent the
therapeutic qualities of the structure from which it was derived.  The
once prevailing hope that a single, dominating constituent, or
ultimate, or a definite substance present in or obtained from a drug,
could be taken to standardize the desirable therapeutic qualities of
the combined medicinal parts of a plant complexity, also passed away."


QUALITY VERSUS QUANTITY - IV.
JOHN URI LLOYD, CINCINNATI, O.
Reprinted, 1931, from the Eclectic Medical Journal, June, 1916.

   Turn to your ECLECTIC MEDICAL JOURNAL, October, 1909, and find
therein a contribution from my pen, titled "Quality Versus Quantity,"
this being the first of a series comprising, with the present article,
eight connected contributions.*  Let us briefly review the foregoing
articles in order to connect therewith, intelligently, the argument
found in the ending of the present contribution.

   An object of the first article was to correct what, in my opinion,
was a well-established fallacy concerning the application of the terms
strength and quality. It was attempted therein to exemplify the fact
that "quality" in a plant pharmaceutical preparation might be defined
as a balanced combination of complexities that, in their natural home
in the drug, were of such a nature as to require the application of
discriminative pharmaceutical methods.  Let us quote:

   "Let us define strength as a dominating something that stands out
boldly, and which, in toxic drugs, produces a violent or energetic
action, as does the poisonous something that produces death when an
overdose of a toxic drug is administered.  Let us define quality as a
balanced combination of other somethings, with just enough of the toxic
agent to make a complex product that as a whole, has wider functions
than are possible if the single, death-dealing substance dominates."

   This view had for many years preceding that date dominated my
thought, and in order that the problem might be presented to my
readers, a comparison with a familiar substance was introduced, in
which a distinction was made between the strength and quality of wine,
as follows:

   "For example, the strength  of wine lies in its alcoholic proportion,
but the quality of wine depends on the attributes imparted by
accompanying congeners, such as water, potassium salts, ethers, acids,
tannates and such.  These, if balanced, the one in proportion to the
others, produce wines of varying qualities."

   "A boy can add an ounce of alcohol to a pint of wine and thus, for
a few cents, double its strength; but a vintage of exceptional quality,
with less alcoholic strength, commands a price far above that of pure
alcohol."

   As a connected thought it was shown that a drug might likewise be
dominated by a conspicuous toxic agent which, in a pharmaceutical
preparation, could be designed to carry this material in the extreme.
But as a pharmaceutical preparation it could, for special purposes, be
made much more valuable by decreasing the proportion of the toxic
agent, in order that the less energetic associates might exert
themselves.  Nux vomica is thus selected as a conspicuous example:

   "The dominating, poisonous agent in nux vomica is a strychnine
compound, and on this substance rests the official (U.S.P.) strength of
the drug. But nux vomica contains other alkaloidal structures and
essential oils, as well as other organic complexities, which, balanced
in Eclectic pharmacy and thus used in Eclectic therapy, are necessary
to the quality of the Eclectic preparation, nux vomica. In the
standardizing of nux vomica the United States Pharmacopeia recognizes
strychnine only, whilst the Eclectic physician considers strychnine, in
undue proportion, objectionable, in that it then dangerously
overbalances quality.

 * * *

   "A novice in pharmacy can add seventy grains of strychnine to a
U.S.P. fluid extract of nux vomica and thus double its pharmacopeial
strength."

   This article closes with the kindly suggestion that the present
method of standardizing a pharmaceutical preparation by making it carry
the greatest possible amount of one dominating agent is not conducive
to the highest pharmaceutical thought-standard.  Let us quote:

   "In our opinion, the attempt to standardize a preparation by a single
dominating constituent is but a struggle towards a pharmaceutical
standard of excellence, in which therapetic quality should be the
ideal."

   Carrying this line of thought into the next article, titled
"Standards of Excellence," 1909, a plea is made for the idiosyncrasies
of men possessed of other viewpoints, and especially for committees
whose responsibilities necessitate their making standards on
long-accepted pharmaco-therapeutic lines. This is exemplified as
follows:

   "A standard established by one man, or a committee of men, may be
correct from their one viewpoint, but need not necessarily be a
standard that, under different conditions, may prevail in the thought
and action of other men."

   It is next shown that pharmaceutical research needs be easily
paralyzed if such an authoritative standard prevents further
investigation. It is also shown that

   "A chemist or a committee, thinking only of the conspicuous agent,
may ignore the milder entities, and in the glare of this one dominating
light establish a very one-sided standard, which may neglect unseen
qualities that lie beyond the thing that makes the standard of the man
of toxic faith."

   It is also shown that a chemist or a committee possessed of the power
of thus establishing the value of a pharmaceutical preparation by
making such an inflexible law might make a very one-sided standard.
Indeed, I ventured to give my opinion of the harmful result of such
authorities' rulings, could it be legalized absolutely and irrevocably:

   "To make such an inflexible law would be to paralyze pharmaceutical
research."

   It is stated that uncharitable inflexibility as concerns the
privilege ofothers possessed of other viewpoints, such as a belief in
the usefulness of non-toxic agents, could do a mighty wrong in
preventing pharmaceutical progress.  Indeed, I ventured to record that

   "In accordance with this line of thought, we believe that
standardization, through an honest misconception of possibilities and
probabilities outside their field, is too often inclined to
uncharitable error.  We believe that in many cases it would be better
if a smaller amounta much smaller amountof certain dominating drug
constituents were present in preparations of poisonous drugs designed
for the curative treatment of certain disease expressions.  Our study
of several decades has taught us this lesson.  In other words, because
a certain drug in prime quality contains naturally a certain amount of
an energetic or poisonous alkaloid, glucoside or resin, it does not
necessarily follow that a pharmaceutical preparation is balanced to the
best advantage, for a special therapeutic use, when it carries that
full proportion of energetics, which will be, in some cases, a
dominating load of poison.

* * *

   "Let us repeat that the standard of pharmaceutical excellence, in our
opinion, does not necessarily reside in the one toxic agent, but is to
be found in the balanced structure of the preparation's evolution from
the crude drug. Nor does therapeutic excellence  necessarily rest on an
overload of a dominating, ever-conspicuous toxic constituent of a
drug."

   Passing now to two contributions, titled "Concerning Albumen," we are
presented with a viewpoint designed, through a consideration of this
well known substance, to indicate that like substances contained in a
drug and that aredeemed to be inert and inactive, may, under certain
conditions, become possessed of exceeding energy. Indeed, an ordinary
food taken into the stomach, and universally considered as most
excellent even for invalids, may, under other forms and conditions,
become most unbelievably energetic.  The article of Dr.Eccles, in the
Medical Record of August, 1911, on "Albumen," is presented as a text.
Let us quote:

   "A startling recent revelation is 'that one-millionth of a cubic
centimeter ofa 5 per cent. solution of a three-time crystallized
egg-albumen, or one-twentieth of a millionth of a gram of protein, will
sensitize a guinea-pig enough so that distinct and typical symptoms are
produced after a second injection of the same material, while one
fifty-thousandth of a cubic centimeter of solution containing but
one-millionth of a gram of protein sensitizes fatally.'  Try to grasp
the full significance of these words.  Think of one grain of egg-white
being divided into over 66,600 equal parts, and one of these parts
proving as deadly to a guinea-pig as a bullet through its heart.
Strychnine and prussic acid are deadly, but they are almost harmless
when compared with hen's egg protein, administered intravenously after
sensitization.  We consume this deadly material with impunity as a
constant article of diet.  Friedberger tells that 'if into a guinea-pig
a tenth of a milligram of the serum proteid of a sheep is injected
subcutaneously, and if at a later period, as early as after ten days,
five milligrams of the same proteid are injected into a vein, the
animal goes into convulsions, has asphyxia, and dies.' "              

   In summing up the problem, wherein, if the authorities quoted be
correct, a touch of pure albumen in the veins produces death almost as
does an electric shock, it is, furthermore, shown that all our
food-grains, such as nuts, corn, peas, beans, and certain similar
products, may, in like manner, produce fatal results.

   Article No. 3 attempts to connect such as the foregoing with the
beliefs of physicians who accept that exceedingly dilute attenuations
produce, in clinical practice, most pronounced therapeutic effects.
Reference is made to the fact that not only the Homeopathic profession,
but many physicians outside, were becoming imbued with a belief in the
influence exerted by triturates, even of presumably inert organics,
when adminstered under certain intervals of time. Thus we quote:

   "Turn now to Webster's "Dynamic Therapeutics," written by one who had
been first reared in a line of instruction in which large doses
predominated. Note how this experienced practitioner proceeds to
instruct the reader that small dose sare often better than large ones,
and that even the second or third trituration, often repeated, gives
frequently an intensified therapeutic touch.  Even more clearly than
this is stated the fact, as demonstrated by Dr. Webster's experience,
that substances like the inorganics, in concrete form, when taken in
large quantities, have no apparent disturbing influence on life, but,
when finely comminuted and given in minute amounts at short intervals,
are followed by most positive influences in disease expressions.
Indeed, such substances as silica (deemed practically insoluble and
inert) are by him commended in very minute amount, but they must be
very finely comminuted."

   Indeed, it being evident that the dose of the triturated silica of
Dr. Webster was immeasurably greater than the albumen that killed the
dog, I made a plea for further liberality of thought, as follows:

   "But still further liberality is demanded when such doses as Dr.
Webster and other standard Eclectic physicians employ are contrasted
with the minute amountof albumen (Eccles) has the power of not only
influencing the life current of a normal creature, but of cutting the
thread of life and producing death."

   Then comes the next article, where, having introduced the preceding
texts, we swing back to the original thought of the 1909 article,
"Strength Versus Quality, "finding now that the nearly paralleling
title, "Quality Versus Quantity," is selected.  In this the aim is to
fortify the original statement by a resume of the evidence introduced
in the subsequent contributions.  For this purpose the major part of
the 1909 article "Strength Versus Quality," was reproduced, with the
following comment, in which recognition is given to the pleasure I
experienced in the increasing liberality of opponents of other days,
who then viewed the subject of drug study and therapeutic action
differently from myself.  Let us quote:

   "With the above before us, a further step may well take our thought
in the direction of quality in contradistinction to quantity, as
applied to therapy.  And it much pleases us all to appreciate that not
alone the physician, the pharmacist and the manufacturer, but the
purely scientific chemist as well, is now directing his careful
attention to this problem, whose outreaching possibilities uprise
before us all.  And to me, particularly, comes the pleasant reflection
that, with the extension of thought in these directions, arises
naturally a liberality of action in opponents of other days in which
the old-style resistance to pharmaceutical investigation in outside
lines is fast being relinquished."

   Indeed, this phase of the subject is given a special touch, in which
is made the suggestive thought that progress in this direction would
necessarily extend to outsiders, and that not only a toleration as
concerns their own belief, but the welcome due investgators working in
other lines for a common purpose, would follow.  This is tersely
exhibited as follows:

   "And, strange as it may seem, this toleration now extended toward the
'Irregular' and his empirical work is bred of pure scientific thought
and investigation."


QUALITY VERSUS QUANTITYV.
JOHN URI LLOYD, CINCINNATI, O.
Reprinted, 1931, from the Eclectic Medical Journal, July, 1916.

   One of the discouraging features connected with pharmaceutical
problems has been the systematic attempt, as this writer views the
subject, to retard personal investigation by restricting one who is
concerned in research to authoritative publications that, through the
passing of years, become, sooner or later, inadequate.  Again, it would
seem that an effort is being made to put all manipulative pharmacists
on a common level, it being argued that what ever is accomplished by
one man can be as well accomplished by every man.  Possibly these
erroneous views and practices, which are conspicuous in pharmaceutical
politics, have done more to discourage the young pharmacist who has
aggressively attempted to individualize himself by his efforts, as well
as those who are older, than any other problem that confronts the
pharmacist.  The fact is, even the man who follows most carefully
formulas recorded in authoritative publications may, by his
manipulations, produce a pharmaceutical preparation quite different
from that made by some other man, and that, too, even when the
ingredients employed by both are identical.

   Need one, as a comparison, do more than refer to the different
qualities of bread or cake, or, indeed, of any prepared food, made from
the same materials by different persons working under the same formula?
 Is not every-one aware of the fact that quality governs in cases like
these; that strength, so far as the use of materials is concerned, is
incidental thereto; that from the best of flour can be made the most
unpalatable, as well as unwholesome, bread; that some people can never
learn to manipulate the simplest food constituents so as to equal a
product made by some other person who seemingly has the knack of
palatably compounding this or that food product ?

   But the question may be asked, "What has this to do with the quality
of remedies made of identical materials, that are manipulated by expert
pharmacists, who cannot be said to be inexperienced, awkward or
careless ?"  In this thought let us go a step farther and ask, "Can a
single material, under varying physical conditions, become possessed of
different qualities?"  Let us extract from the leading article, from
the pen of the writer, contributed to the ECLECTIC MEDICAL JOURNAL,
April, 1914, the following sentence:

   "The quality of a drug depends not alone on the weight of the
materials; its physical condition is all-important."

   With this thought in mind, let us introduce as a text, or as texts,
the varying qualities of some element that assumes, under different
physical conditions, most remarkable phases, these distinctions being
qualities due to manipulations of that one element only.

   First, take the element carbon, which in its commonest form is known
as charcoal.  Let this be purified to the ultimate by the exclusion of
all foreign substances.  It is now black, tasteless, odorless,
insoluble.  Exceedingly inflammable, it burns in the air, leaving no
ash.  Take now this same element, carbon, in the form known as
graphite.  It is still black,insoluble, odorless and tasteless, but
instead of burning in the open air, as does charcoal, it so
persistently refuses to unite with oxygen that it is utilized in the
making of crucibles designed to stand exceedingly high temperatures,
crucibles of graphite of immense size being employed in the melting of
iron and other metals that require a very high heat for their
liquefaction.  Pass now to a third form of carbon, the diamond.  Behold
! the carbon is no longer opaque, but brilliantly transparent.  It no
longer burns in the air at an ordinary temperature, but at a very high
temperature it unites with oxygen and disappears, with the forma tion
of the same gas that follows the burning of charcoal in the air.
Instead of being easily powdered as is the case with charcoal and
withgraphite, it ranks with the hardest of known bodies, a slender edge
scarcely wearing from continued use in the cutting of glass.  Bear
these facts in mind, because these radically different materials are
simply quality shadings in a single element.

   Second, pass now to phosphorus, which in its active form is
translucent and nearly colorless, resembling soft beeswax.  If held
beneath water it can be molded into different shapes; at a higher
temperature, it melts and flows like oil; at a still higher
temperature, it volatilizes and escapes as a gas.  It dissolves in
bisulphide of carbon and other similar solvents much after the manner
in which substances such as paraffin dissolve.  On exposure to the air,
even at the ordinary temperature, it is likely to catch fire
spontaneously, and, burning, entirely disappear.  It is poisonous to
animal life, and, if used internally, needs be a~ninistered in small
doses.

   Place this same material, pure phosphorus, in an air-tight cylinder,
expose it to a temperature of 300 degrees F. for twenty-four hours,
more or less, then cool and open the vessel.  No longer is the
phosphorus a waxy substance; it can be scraped out in red fragments.
No longer does it ignite on exposure to the air or by the blow of a
hammer; it can be powdered in a mortar without danger of combustion.
It does not now dissolve in bisulphide of carbon; it is comparatively
odorless as contrasted with the ordinary form of phosphorus, and in
ordinary doses it is not classed among the active poisons.  In fact,
this new form of phosphorusfor, though physically changed, it is still
phosphorusis as unlike the other as though they were different
materials or different elements.

   Such rules as these apply to many other elements; in fact, had we
determined the qualities of all the elements, we might find that the
rule is universal and not exceptional. Metals pass from the amorphous
into the crystalline form and the reverse, each state carrying
qualities peculiar to itself. Thus the different qualities of aluminum
are probably due to the mixtures of crystalline and amorphous
aluminums.  Let us quote from the Chemical News, London,England, May
19, 1916, as follows:

   "The amount of cold work which can be done upon aluminum is limited
by the formation of the amorphous state.  Microscopic examination of
polished and etched specimens taken at various stages during cold
working shows that the crystalline structure disappears at a very early
stage in the working, and unless the metal is annealed it will become
fatigued, developing a species 'Forcier-krankheit.'  Aluminum which has
been subjected to excessive cold work shows an entire absence of
structure, and has the appearance of a metal which has flowed and
passed into a vitreous state.  The reverse change takes place with
extreme slowness, and the ordinary annealing process does not change
the structure from amorphous to crystalline.  Aluminum annealed at a
temperature of 500 degrees C. for ten hours appears to be 'dead soft,'
and has its maximum elongation; nevertheless, it is still largely
amorphous in structure when examined microscopically.  Aluminum which
has been annealed in this way without affecting the structure, or only
slightly altering it, hardens very rapidly when additional cold work is
done upon the metal.  The primitive crystals are transformed into the
amorphous state much more readily than the larger crystals which are
developed by annealing.  The results of the specific heat determination
render the conclusion probable that under the influence of cold work
aluminum is transformed into an amorphous variety.  The conclusion is
only put forward tentatively, since, at present, there is no means of
determining the amount of each phase present in the hard metal, hence
the results which have been obtained for hard aluminum are for a metal
consisting of a mixture, in unknown proportions, of the two forms of
the metal.  Long annealing seems to yield a metal in the most definite
condition; cast metal is greatly influenced by the casting temperature
and rate of cooling."

   Consider the varying qualities of such elements as nitrogen and
oxygen. Consider the different conditions of gold in its various
colloidal forms.  Think of all these problems, many of which have been
recorded a century or longer, others of which are just beginning to
open to view, and then ask yourself the question, "Is not the study of
'qualities' in pharmaceutical manipulation the dominating field of him
who experiments, reasons and accomplishes therein?  Is not the man who
reasons from such numberless thought outreaches as we have introduced
as likely to evolve a beneficial something which may be due simply to a
changed physical condition of a well-known compound as is the man who
searches in outside lines for useful products among the unknown
compounds ?"

   Indeed, the problems in pharmacy that now most appeal to this writer
are not so much in the line of discovering new remedial agents to
supplant those now established as to give to the users of medicines the
wealth that comes from manipulative pharmacy and balanced research
applied directly towards the study of quaIities.

   In research such as this, mass action, structural affinities and
colloidal influences become all-important factors.  Need we seek modern
texts?  Are not those of old sufficient?  Are not the qualities of
active phosphorus, as contrasted with red phosphorus, and of carbon as
it appears in graphite, charcoal and the diamond, or of the different
forms of nitrogen and oxygen, sufficient to open the door to the
pharmacist, who, applying to his own field such distinctions as these,
turns his thought to the study of quality distinctions in his own
field?

   Can we not now, in a receptive mental position, move into a higher
phase of pharmaceutical research than that based upon mere strength as
governed by weight and measure of the materials manipulated?  Is not
higher pharmacy the art of establishing quality distinctions rather
than distinctions in crude materials?

   Let us take as a final text the substance known as "silica,"which,
in nearly a pure form, constitutes quartz and sand.  This substance, in
its natural form, is considered to be practically insoluble, but in a
colloidal form it becomes actively otherwise.  Indeed, in the form of a
triturate, carried almost to the mechanical ultimate, silica has long
enjoyed a distinctive reputation with careful physicians of both the
Homeopathic and Eclectic schools. Turn to"Silica," in Webster's
"Dynamical Therapeutics," and note his comments on its use in the form
mentioned.  Then, as a final touch, read the paper of Dr. S. P. Kramer,
contributed to the Research Society of Cincinnati, March 2, 1916, and
published in the New York Medical Journal, April 8, 1916.  These
citations will partly, but only partly, prepare one for the results of
Dr. Kramer's investigations.  Let us quote:

   "When solutions of colloidal silicic acid (silica) are injected into
the jugular vein of rabbits or dogs, under certan conditions death of
the animal occurs by intravascular clotting of the blood."

   This indicates that colloidal silica has the power of producing
death, but the amount employed is not as yet stated.  Pass now to the
following extract:

   "In a typical experiment, a dog weighing ten pounds was killed by the
jugular injection of 70 mgm. of colloidal silica in a solution
containing 1.4 per cent., the solution being near gelatinthat is,
opalescent."

   Then ask yourself the question, "How much colloidal silica is carried
in this seventy milligrams of colloidal solution, containing 1.4 per
cent. of silica?"  The amount, expressed in grains, would be 15/1000 of
a grain, an amount less than would cover a pencil point.  Pass farther
along and we find that Dr. Kramer gives next the manner in which death
is produced by this minute amount of silica,which, as has been said,
differs from sand only by reason of its colloidal quality:

   "Animals killed by these injections show the right heart and
pulmonary vessels filled with clot.  The lungs are infarcted and the
acini show the microscopic picture of red hepatization."

   Take next the explanation Dr. Kramer subsequently makes of its action
on the red blood corpuscles, wherein one part of colloidal silicic acid
(silica) is used as a coagulating medium.  We find:

   "There are other striking reactions in vitro.  If colloidal silicic
acid is added to washed sheep red corpuscles in proportion of 1 to
500,000, or even 1 to 1,000,000, a prompt precipitation of all red
corpuscles takes place."

   Bear in mind that Dr. Kramer is neither a Homeopathic nor an Eclectic
physician, but a professional man, fearlessly delving into problems
that come to  him in connection with his profession. He openly presents
to the world this line of experiments, which depend for their phenomena
not on material weight, but upondynamic qualities.  His experimental
processes throw a new light upon what Dr.Webster,  of the Eclectic
school and Dr. Dewey,  of the Homeopathic school, and others, record
concerning the activity of colloidal or micro-divisions of silica.
With all this before us, which barely touches the question of qualities
that are possible to the multitudes of substances that concern the
pharmacist, we may become prepared for a receptive argument regarding
the actions of colloidal bodies, because the study of colloidal
activity is primarily a study of different qualities of a material, and
is mainly dependent upon different physical states or conditions of the
material.


QUALITY VERSUS QUANTITYVI.
JOHN URI LLOYD, CINCINNATI, O.
Reprinted, 1931, from the Eclectic Medical Journal, August, 1916.

   And now, for the first time in this series, is introduced the long
neglected (by the majority) subject of what is now known as "Colloidal
Chemistry." (I prefer the term structural affinity or massaction.
Combinations in this field seem not to be governed by ultimates such as
atomic and molecular weights. Valence seems to be ignored.)  It may not
be out of place to state that only by processes that might be called
offshoots of colloidal chemistry had I been able to explain, even to
myself, the discord that had come into pharmaceutical work under my
laboratory care during the past forty years.

   Bunching, therefore, these problems together, I stated, in the
article now under consideration, "Quality Versus Quantity," March,1914,
as follows

   "Chief among the factors of this liberation of good men from
prejudice is the new chemistry known as 'Colloidal Chemistry.'  In this
'New Chemistry' the best minds of the world are now studying, although
the foundation of the work laid by Graham in the beginning of the last
century has been constantly augmented by others in the passing along."

   And then, more specifically, as a reply to questions now often asked
concerning what colloidal chemistry has in common with plant pharmacy,
came the following:

   "But, it may be asked, what has this to do with our subject?  To such
a question I would reply,  'Everything !'  Colloidal chemistry is based
upon the fact that quantity is but one factor, in many directions that
involve both chemical and therapeutic action.  The condition of a
substance is a mighty factor as concerns its action as a thing, and
necessarily in this case becomes a dominating agent in its therapeutic
application."

   With an attempt to conciliate instead of offend those who might be
hostile to such a view of plant pharmacy, it was next shown that
physicians of both the "old school" and the early Eclectic, as well as
the Homeopath, had in their practice furnished examples that accorded
with the theory of the intensified influences of materials finely
divided, as contrasted with mass bulks.  Let us quote:

   "But even this is not new.  Did not the United States Dispensatory
record, fifty years ago, that six ounces of mercury swallowed by a man
with suicidal intent produced no appreciable action of the mercury,
whereas a few grains of mercury, finely divided, forms the active
agent, blue mass?  The first recorded dose of resin of podophyllum was
a lump of resin as large as the first joint of the thumb, and from this
the patient recovered.  Had the remedy been triturated to a fine
division, it is safe to say that no human being could have withstood
even a portion of that heroic dose.  Physicians comprehend full well
the increased activity of subclivided substances, such as mineral salts
and resins. The works of clinical observers, such as Webster, Scudder,
Ellingwood, Fyfe, Felter, Thomas and others of our school testify to
this fact, whilst every page of any work devoted to Homeopathic therapy
teems with livingexamples."

   Comes now an attempt to distinguish between such materials as have
been mentioned and others truly colloidal.  (I am not in a position to
accept that I can as yet find a line of distinct separation for many
substances that shade from mechanical subdivisions into colloidal
dispersions. I use the term "colloidal" with this qualifying
differentiation.)  This needs to have been very brief, but is yet
fairly comprehensive.  The statement is as follows:

   "And yet such powders as these do not comprehend, other than in very
minute traces, colloidal dispersion.  In these triturates physical
division prevails (dominates).  Colloidal ultimates are practically
unreached.  And yet so marked is the energetic increase of a triturated
drug as to have established the fact of their intrinsic values in
clinical therapy beyond the shadow of a doubt.  The quality of a drug
depends not alone on the weight of the material;  its physical
condition  is all-important."

   With this suggestion, designed to bring the reader into harmony with
the expressed thought, comes a further attempt to show that physicians,
as a rule, have ever recognized the necessity of subdividing their
remedies in order to to obtain the fullest therapeutic value.  For
example:

   "With this thought in mind, consider how physicians of all schools
direct their prescription mixtures of dry drugs to be made into 'a fine
powder.' Note how desirable are the triturates of milk sugar with a
selected salt or resin."

   And with this illustration before the reader again comes the
contrasting of powders such as these with truly colloidal structures,
in which therapeutical and physiological problems are connected with
"colloidal solutions," a term not before ventured.  This is tersely
illustrated in a single sentence:

   "And yet (in mechanical powders) we have not as yet reached such
forms of colloidal structures as stand in liquids without settling;
that pass through a filter paper; that are so finely dispersed as to
even receive the name 'colloidal solutions.' "

   As a final reflection, I presume to ask the readers of this journal,
to which this series of articles has been contributed, most of whom
listened to my lessons on pharmacy in my twenty-five years or more of
teaching in the Eclectic Medical Institute, and who had years ago
become familiar with my view of the subject of plant pharmacy and its
outreaches, to consider the plea then continually made regarding the
many unsolved perplexing factors that concern the investigating
pharmacist whose aim is to serve best the medical profession:

   "Let me repeat that a consideration of such as this is not new to
those who in times gone by have honored me by listening to my lectures.
 Although the experiments of Graham were used as texts for definitions,
we together passed into outreaches that surely will make familiar to
those who listened in those days the principles of "colloidal
activity,' now looming up as a mighty factor in the evolution of
medicine, and which is liberating from bondage the man who believes
that quality is not necessarily dependent on quantity, that the factors
that confront the pharmacist cannot be fully explained by symbols,
formulae and equations."

   In the third paper, "Quality Versus Quantity," a plea is made for the
consideration of natural structures as well as artificial ultimates
broken out of natural structures, it having been time and again argued
by me to my classes, as well as in print, that plant structures, as a
rule, were inexplicably interlaced, and, when normal, usually (if not
universally) colloidal.  Time and again, by lecture as well as in
print, it was attempted to emphasize that, although destructive
chemistry yields invaluable ultimates, constructive pharmacy has a
field to itself:

   "The preceding (two) papers of this series consider in a general way
the problem of plant structures, the aim being to suggest that to
ignore natural structures is to neglect an opportunity in pharmacy.
That whilst the ultimates broken out of structures are of value in
therapy, the structures yielding the ultimates are possessed of
qualities that in many directions make them superior to the artificial
products.
   "It may be reasoned, also, and very consistently,that to dispossess
a natural drug-texture of its colloidal qualities is to alter its
condition other wise than physically.  In this we believe.  And in this
direction we believe the art of pharmacy will yet evolve until its
recognized importance will be established to all concerned in both
chemistry and therapy."

   But again comes the repeated plea that such as this be not considered
as a reflection, in any way, upon the efforts of investigators in other
directions; indeed, the hope is expressed that when these problems are
taken up by the systematically talented scientist the opening view of
plant structures would become a most intensely interesting and useful
study.  For example:

   "Let us again repeat that in such as this no reflection is placed
on either the analytical or synthetical chemist. Upon the contrary, we
believe that the time will come when chemistry will recognize the fact
that the beginning  of this study is the consideration of such problems
as may be expressed by the formulae.  In a time to come will also
follow a scientific comprehension of the pharmacist's structures now
beyond the eyes of the talented men engaged in the study of the
products broken out of these, as yet, voidless and formless colloidal
bodies.!"

   The four pages of 8-point type that followed the above were
reproductions of previous prints by the author, in which plant
pharmacy was viewed from many different angles, all tending to
illustrate that a mighty field of opportunity lay before the pharmacist
who, intelligently and with an open mind, would enter into the problems
that would surely become of increasing interest in the pharmacist's
life of the future.

THE END.

It will be observed that many repetitions are to be found in the
article as a whole. An effort was made to condense and re-arrange the
subject matter so as to make a continuous article as free as possible
from repetition, but the task proved to be greater than would appear to
the casual reader, so it was decided to let each article stand alone as
it was consecutively printed.

The author intended to present this booklet to a few of his pharmaceutical
friends and correspondents.   However, an attempt to do this resulted in
discouragement. He could not differentiate in a society where he hopes
all are friends.