Till: HARMFUL EFFECTS OF ACETANILID, ANTIPYRIN AND 



PHENACETIN. 



SUMMAKY OF DATA COLLECTED. 



\ . tanilid. antipyrin, and acetphenetidin (phenacetin) were intro- 

 duced as remedial agents in 1886, 1884, and 1887, respectively. They 

 were at tir>t u>ed ahno-t exclusively for the reduction of the body 

 temperature in the febrile diseases, but as time went on they were 

 employed h and le for this purpose, particularly in asthenic cases, 

 becau.-e of their depressing effects. On account of their analgesic 

 properties however, they gradually came into use more and more 

 for the relief of pain, and at the present time this may be said to 

 conM it i!i- their iiio>t important field of usefulness. At the time 

 when they \\eiv employed principally as antipyretics their use was 

 dim-ted by the phy-iciaii, and they were administered with medical 

 skill and judgment. In time, however, these agents became better 

 known as analir'-i. - :md were used more and more by the public at 

 large, without medical supervision, for the relief of headache and 

 other minor a. -he- and pains, and at the present time they are used ex- 

 ten>i\cly in thU way. largely in the form of proprietary preparations. 

 The indiscriminate and often ill-advised use of these drugs by the laity 

 ha> been productive of bad effects in many instances. Furthermore, 

 the number of r.-port.-d cases of poisoning by these agents or prepara- 

 tions containing them ha- increased notably during the last few years. 



Since the passage of the food and drugs act, June 30, 1906, the 

 attention of the Department of Agriculture has been directed to this 

 >ubje.-t. particularly in connection with the branding of drug prod- 

 ucts containing one or more of these agents, and an attempt has been 

 made to obtain full and reliable information in regard to their 

 poisonous qualities. That there is considerable diversity of opinion 

 on tl,N Hibject is evident from the testimony given by the medical 

 experts in the recent case of the United States v. R. N. Harper. Mr. 

 Harper was the proprietor of a remedy known as "Harper's Cufor- 

 hedake liraiie-Fude." which contained among other ingredients acet- 

 anilid and antipyrin. At this trial one of the physicians testified 

 that whereas he had formerly used acetanilid rather freely he now 

 pn-criU-d it very guardedly, because of the unexpected and untoward 

 effects which had l>een found to follow its use. Another expert 

 testified that whereas he had formerly used it in his practice he did 



5 



