1 82 
Digitalis  Leaves. 
Am.  Jour.  Pharm. 
March,  1919. 
forward  to  negative  the  results  it  is  logical  to  assume  that  the  death 
of  the  frog  with  heart  in  systole,  or  the  stoppage  of  the  heart  in 
systole  in  one  hour  is  a  satisfactory  measure  of  the  activity  of  a 
digitalis  preparation.  Compared  with  the  guinea-pig  method  of 
Reed  and  Vanderkleed14  and  the  Hatcher  cat  method,15  both  of  which 
are  purely  toxicity  methods,  the  frog  methods  have  the  advantage 
that  deaths  from  other  than  digitalis  poisoning  are  eliminated  and 
form  no  part  of  the  record. 
TABLE  II. 
Digitalis  Leaves  Non-Official  from  a  Garden  on  Grosse  Ile,  Mich. 
Not  Dried. 
Oven  Dried. 
Weight. 
Dose. 
Result. 
Weight. 
Dose. 
Result. 
Weight. 
Dose. 
Result. 
17 
O.OO4 
Dead 
20 
O.OO4 
Dead 
23-5 
0.002 
Alive 
18.5 
0.005 
27 
0.005 
25 
0.003 
Dead 
19-5 
OOO6 
23-5 
0.006 
25 
0.004 
27-5 
0.007 
23-5 
0.007 
25-5 
0.005 
18 
O.OOIO 
Alive 
2Ii  " 
O.OOIO 
Alive 
19-5 
O.OOIO 
Alive 
19 
0.0020 
Dead 
22 
0.0020 
20 
0.0015 
19 
O.OO3O 
22.5 
0.0030 
20.5 
0.0020 
19 
O.OO4O 
25 
0.0040 
21.5 
0.0025 
20 
O.OO5O 
27-5 
0.0050 
Dead 
22.5 
0.0030 
18 
O.OOIO 
Alive 
23 
0.0035 
Dead 
30 
0.0025 
Alive 
19-5 
0.0015 
Dead 
23 
0.0040 
28 
0.0030 
Dead 
20.5 
0.0020 
23 
0.0045 
28 
'0.0035 
21 
O.OO25 
23-5 
0.0050 
29 
0.0040 
21 
0.0030 
23-5 
0.0060 
30 
0.0045 
22.5 
0.0020 
Alive 
23 
0.0025 
25 
0.0030 
27 
O.OO33 
Dead 
27-5 
O.OO4O 
Sun 
Air 
Dried. 
M.  L.  D  0.0015  0.0035  0.0030 
H.  T.  U                       44  .19  22 
Per  cent  activity  . .      730  310  370 
Activity  compared 
to  undried               100%  42  50 
One  may  conclude,  therefore,  that  oven  drying  has  no  advantage 
over  a  reasonably  rapid  air  drying  of  digitalis  leaves,  and  that  the 
drying  causes  a  marked  deterioration,  no  products  more  highly  toxic 
14  Reed  and  Vanderkleed,  Am.  J.  Pharm.,  80,  no,  1908. 
15  Hatcher  and  Brody,  ibid.,  82,  369,  1910. 
