446 
Progress  in  Pharmacy. 
(Am.  Jour.  Pharm. 
\  September,  1910. 
following  have  been  found  to  occur  most  frequently:  Airol,  2; 
aristol,  5  ;  aspirin,  8 ;  benzonaphthol,  4 ;  betol,  2 ;  creosotal,  4 ; 
dermatol,  14;  dionin,  4;  diuretin,  13;  doutal,  14;  /3-eucaine,  4; 
euquinine,  3 ;  heroin,  6 ;  iodol,  4 ;  lactophenin,  3 ;  novocaine,  2 ; 
protargol,  6 ;  pyramidon,  3 ;  salipyrin,  1 1  ;  salophen,  4 ;  stovaine, 
2;  tannalbin,  6;  tannigen,  4;  tannoform,  3;  trional,  13;  uro- 
tropin,  7;  veronal,  4;  xeroform,  3.  These  popular  or  trade  names 
are,  however,  but  seldom  included  as  the  official  title. 
British  Pharmacopceia. — The  British  Pharmacopoeia  Com- 
mittee of  Reference  in  Pharmacy  has  presented  a  second  report 
to  the  General  Medical  Council  which  is  summarized  in  the  Chemist 
and  Druggist,  for  July  2,  19 10,  p.  52,  and  embodies  the  results  of 
the  work  accomplished  in  connection  with  the  revision  of  the  British 
Pharmacopceia  from  November  18,  1908,  to  December  16,  1909. 
The  report  has  been  published  complete  by  Messrs.  Spottiswoode 
&  Co.,  Ltd.,  5  New  Street  Square,  London,  and  may  be  obtained 
from  them  post-free  for  is.  id. 
Safeguarding  the  Public  Health. — So  much  has  been  said 
recently  in  connection  with  the  possible  extension  of  public  health 
work  that  many  druggists  appear  to  be  decidedly  confused  regard- 
ing the  desirability  of  having  work  of  this  kind  done  under  the 
auspices  of  the  National  Government.  Much  of  this  confusion  is, 
no  doubt,  due  to  the  positive  misstatements  that  have  appeared  in 
some  of  the  more  widely  circulated  trade  journals  and  it  may  be 
reassuring  to  at  least  some  to  learn  that  the  so-called  medical  trust 
is  not  responsible  for  the  origin  of  all  public  health  legislation. 
An  editorial  (American  Medicine,  1910,  v.  16,  pp.  339-342),  in 
discussing  the  general  subject,  points  out  that:  "Opposition  to  a 
national  department  of  health  from  any  one  who  does  not  have 
some  selfish  interest  liable  to  be  restricted  or  regulated  by  the  pro- 
posed plans  is  quite  incomprehensible. 
"  The  fallacious  argument  promulgated  by  the  '  National  League 
for  Medical  Freedom  '  against  the  proposed  national  department  of 
health  is  not  apt  to  deceive  for  long  any  but  those  who  wish  to  be 
deceived. 
"The  people  will  soon  realize  the  truth,  that  the  forces  behind 
the  '  League  for  Medical  Freedom  '  are  not  as  lily  white  and  free 
from  ulterior  motives  as  those  exploiting  it  would  like  to  convey. 
Unquestionably  many  have  been  attracted  to  this  organization  in 
good  faith  and  with  no  other  object  than  to  further  the  principle 
