12 
minimum nor a maximum) dose for adults,” and further directed it to 
declare “that neither this Convention, nor the Committee of Revision 
created by it. intends to have these doses regarded as obligatory on 
the physician or as forbidding him to exceed them whenever in his 
judgment this seems advisable.” A table of these doses has been 
compiled and inserted in this bulletin. 
RETATIOX OF PHYSICIANS TO THE PHARMA COPCEIA. 
A few words may be added regarding the relation of the physician 
to the Pharmacopoeia. The U. S. Pharmacopoeia had its origin in the 
medical profession, and the early editions were entirely the work of 
physicians. Although so vitally interested in the Pharmacopoeia — 
for in many cases it is the physician’s sole legal guarantee of the 
quality of the drug’s he uses — and although medical men are always 
represented on the Committee of Revision, the medical profession as 
a whole can scarcely be said to give the publication the support it 
deserves; physicians often prescribe proprietary drugs or articles 
under commercial names when a greater familiarity with the Pharma- 
copoeia would show that there are official preparations of similar 
character but of more uniform composition. The authority of the 
Pharmacopoeia, however, is steadily increasing: nearly half the States 
have made it the legal standard for drugs, and whenever a “pure 
drug bill” is proposed it is assumed, almost as a matter of course, 
that the U. S. Pharmacopoeia is to be the standard by which the 
quality of drugs is to be judged. Despite the fact that there may, 
and of necessity always will, be certain minor imperfections in the 
Pharmacopoeia, it is and will remain the leading standard: and no one 
questions the imperative need of such a standard. 
The need of such a standard for drugs intended for the use of 
physicians is all the more evident when it is remembered that some 
manufacturers who do make standard pharmacopoeial preparations 
nevertheless frankly admit that they put upon the market other prep- 
arations of the same substance by no means of pharmacopoeial stand- 
ard but under names almost identical with the pharmacopoeial names. 
These manufacturers claim that, when the official article is not specifi- 
cally designated, popular demand and commercial competition justify 
this procedure. The possible dangers in such a course must at once 
be apparent, and this practice is one of the reasons for the legal 
requirement in many States that any article sold under a pharma- 
copoeial name must conform to pharmacopoeial standards. 
The Pharmacopoeia is moreover the chief bulwark of one of the most 
time-honored principles of the medical profession, namely, that there 
must be no secrets about the drugs used in the treatment of disease. 
Ppon this question, that physicians must have full knowledge of all 
the constituents and of all the properties of the drugs they prescribe, 
