45 
10. PURITY AND STRENGTH. 
Coblentz, Virgil, discusses in some detail the general principles 
which underlay the adoption of the “ Purity Rubric,” to secure uni- 
formity and avoid misconstruction of the intention of the text. — 
Am. J. Pharm., Phila., 1906, v. 78, p. 303 if. 
Arny, H. V., joins in praise of the new standard, which he con- 
siders a monument to American pharmacy. Rarely has a revision 
brought about so many radical changes, and, what is best, nearly 
every change is a distinct advance over the standards of a decade 
since. * * * The “ Purity Rubric ” * * * will prove a de- 
cided safeguard to those retail pharmacists whose interests are jeop- 
ardized by overzealous food and drug commissioners, a safeguard 
more than counterbalancing any possible objection raised against 
reduction of the standard based on the fact that the average manu- 
facturer is prone to live up to the minimum requirement of any 
standard. — Ibid ., v. 78, p. 10. 
Searby, TV M., attributes the introduction of the purity rubric 
to rigid state laws imposing penalties for the sale of drugs or 
pharmaceutical preparations below the standard of the U. S. P., 
to the enhanced cost of absolute purity, and the fact that a small 
amount of impurity of an innocuous character is unobjectionable. — - 
Ibid., v. 78, p. 209. 
Remington, J. P., in discussing Coblentz’s comments upon the 
U. S. P. inorganic chemicals [a reply to the adverse criticism of 
Henry Leffman], said that the rubric for chemicals had not been 
adversely criticised. — Ibid., v. 78, p. 150. 
Vanderkleecl, C. E., asserts that the U. S. P. VIII has hardly 
yet been in force sufficiently long to enable one to come to any very 
general conclusions as to what effect, if any, the “ Purity Rubric ” 
will have upon the quality of chemicals made by the large factories. — 
Proc. Pennsylvania Pharm. Ass., 1906, p. 121. 
An editorial points out that the claims made for the practicability 
and value of the purity rubric, so far as the inorganic chemicals in 
the U. S. P. VIII, are concerned, have been fairly well substanti- 
ated. — Am. Druggist, N. Y., 1906, v. 49, p. 159. 
Leffman, Henry, says that the control of the purity of preparations 
must be attained through control of the purity of the original mate- 
rials, but the methods of the pharmacist can never go to the first 
condition. He will always rely on the manufacturer at some point, 
and the purity of a preparation can be as well controlled in the 
preparation itself as in the crude source. * * * Minute tests, 
such as those for nitrous compounds in sulphuric acid, are unnec- 
essary. — Am. J. Pharm., Phila., 1906, v. 78, p. 81. 
