8 
Special attention is directed to the following points: 
1. Terminology . — The general plan regarding terminology is ex- 
pressed in the following extract from the General Principles to be 
Followed in Revising the Pharmacopoeia, adopted by the Pharmaco- 
poeia! Convention of 1900: 
cc * * * newh" admitted articles it is recommended 
that such titles be chosen as are in harmony with general usage and 
convenient for prescribing; but in the case of chemicals of a delinite 
composition a scientific name should be given, at least as a synonym.” 
In accordance with this general principle a large number of syn- 
thetic remedies have been admitted into the Pharmacopoeia, not under 
their trade or commercial names b}" which many are well known to the 
profession, but, in most cases, under names approximating, as closeh^ 
as practicable, their true chemical names. Thus “ Phenacetin ” is 
admitted as Acetjylienetidinum., a name which shows at once that this 
substance belongs to the great group of phenetidin compounds. 
“Aristol” is admitted as Thymolis lodidum^ a name showing that 
this substance is an iodine compound of thymol. While a few of these 
new names ma}" at first lead to some confusion, it is certain that the}" 
will ultimately greatly simplify not only the terminology, but also our 
understanding of the nature and use of such substances. For exam- 
ple, at present the same chemical compound is sometimes put on the 
market under a variety of commercial names. Thus, hexamethylene 
tetramine is sold under at least seven different names, most of which 
refer in a vague way to some supposed therapeutic value of the drug, 
and not to its chemical nature. The Pharmacopoeia admits this sub- 
stance under the name llexamethylenamina and fixes a standard of 
purity. By demanding the U. S. Pharmacopoeia article the plysician 
is not onl}" assured a product of uniform high qualit}^, but he aids in 
reducing the multiplicity of names which is so often a source of confu- 
sion. Because of the different names under which a given drug is sold, 
it is no wonder that physicians who have failed to secure the results 
expected from a certain drug have prescribed it again under a different 
name, but with the impression that they were trying something new. 
The use of the chemical names, as far as practicable, is also a great aid 
in classifying the compounds which are being put upon the market in 
such ever increasing numbers. If the physician understands the chem- 
ical nature of a comparatively few well-known substances he will more 
readily see the relations of the new ones to these, and will appreciate 
how slight man}" of the modifications are. In fact, notwithstanding 
the number of the latter, drugs of distinctly new therapeutic properties 
are rare. 
Aside from the evident desirability of having names at least sug- 
gesting the chemical nature of the drug, there is another reason for 
giving preference to the Pharmacopcsial names. A substance is often 
