THE  AMERICAN 
JOURNAL  OF  PHARMACY 
MAY,  I90fl£  ^ 
THE  DETECTION  OF  ARSENIC\lR  BISMt^F 
PREPARATIONS.   X^C*  < 
By  B.  P.  Caldweu,. 
A  recent  test  for  arsenic  resulted  in  a  controversy  between  a 
prominent  pharmacist  and  myself,  the  account  of  which  I  venture 
to  hope  may  be  interesting. 
The  drug — a  preparation  of  milk  of  bismuth,  consisting  of  the 
basic  carbonate — was  prescribed  by  a  physician  for  a  patient  who, 
after  the  first  dose  or  two,  was  attacked  with  symptoms  of  arsenical 
poisoning,  which  were  attributed  to  the  bismuth  preparation.  He 
immediately  stopped  the  use  of  the  prescription  and  reported  the 
case  to  the  pharmacist  with  the  request  that  he  look  into  the  matter. 
The  latter  did  so  and  found  arsenic  present — which  fact  he  reported 
to  the  manufacturers.  The  chemist  of  the  manufacturing  house  then 
examined  a  portion  of  the  contents  of  the  druggist's  stock  bottle 
from  which  the  prescription  had  been  filled,  but  found  no  arsenic. 
The  manufacturing  concern  then  placed  the  matter  in  my  hands 
with  a  request  for  an  immediate  report  on  the  presence  or  absence 
of  arsenic  in  their  bismuth  preparation.  I  thereupon  procured  in 
the  market  a  bottle  of  the  preparation,  a  portion  of  the  same  from 
the  druggist's  stock  bottle,  and  the  patient's  prescription  to  which 
the  evil  effects  had  been  attributed. 
After  carefully  examining  these  I  failed  to  find  arsenic  in  any  one. 
I  carried  out  the  Marsh  test  (both  with  cold  porcelain  plunged  into 
the  hydrogen  flame  and  with  the  constricted  heated  tube),  the 
Gutzeit  test,  and  the  Bettendorf  test,  and  repeated  the  work  more 
than  once  without  result.    I  tested  the  sensitivity  of  my  materials 
(201) 
