Am.  Jour.  Pharm. ") 
September,  1910.  / 
Progress  in  Pharmacy. 
443 
not  without  cause  and  justification  (/.  Am.  M.  Ass.,  1910,  v.  55, 
P-  343)- 
Pharmacopceial  Revision. — Dr.  A.  S.  Loevenhart,  in  discus- 
sing the  above,  points  out  that  the  situation  is  not  encouraging. 
The  whole  drug  business  is  in  a  bad  state  in  many  ways.  With 
some  striking  exceptions,  the  vast  majority  of  drug  houses  are 
interested  purely  and  simply  in  the  making  of  money  and  are 
unconcerned  with  the  question  of  public  health.  Moreover,  our 
expectations  with  regard  to-  the  pharmacopceial  convention  have 
been  absolutely  disappointed.  The  convention  was  dominated  by 
poor  medical  schools  and  the  pharmaceutical  associations  in  the 
interests  of  the  drug  trade.  The  convention  refused  to  pass  a 
resolution  excluding  from  the  Pharmacopoeia  drugs  which  are 
known  to  possess  no  therapeutic  effect.  It  is  impossible  to  use  the 
Pharmacopoeia  with  our  students. 
Medical  Education. — The  Carnegie  Foundation  report  on 
medical  education  has  been  widely  commented  on  in  medical  and 
lay  journals.  While  this  report  contains  many  statements  of  detail 
which  may  be  criticised,  the  general  trend  of  the  report  has  been 
generally  commended,  particularly  in  lay  journals  which,  like 
the  New  York  Globe,  argue :  "  If  the  doors  of  the  state  university, 
rich  in  educational  opportunities,  qualified  to  turn  out  real  doctors, 
lawyers,  engineers,  and  the  like  are  open  to  all,  why  should  the 
manufacture  of  feebly  qualified  professional  men  by  others  be 
tolerated  at  all." 
National  Formulary  and  the  American  Medical  Asso- 
ciation.— Considerable  space  has  been  devoted,  in  recent  issues 
of  pharmaceutical  and  drug  journals,  to  the  discussion  of  the 
attitude  taken  by  the  American  Medical  Association  Committee 
on  National  Formulary  and  the  refusal  to  co-operate  with  the  Com- 
mittee on  National  Formulary  in  the  revision  of  that  book.  Much 
of  the  published  discussion  is  designed  to  confuse  rather  than 
correct  existing  opinions  regarding  the  aims  and  the  objects  in- 
volved. 
To  be  entirely  clear  in  the  matter  it  should  be  remembered 
that  the  American  Medical  Association  through  its  Council  on 
Pharmacy  and  Chemistry  has  adopted  certain  standards  to  which 
materia  medica  products  are  expected  to  comply,  and  it  would 
be  manifestly  unfair  for  this  association  to  require  compliance 
with  its  standards  by  the  preparations  enumerated  in  New  and 
