Harvey Wiley's Wild Vaporing

DR. WILEY'S WILD VAPORINGS.

Dr. H. W. Wiley, Chief of the Bureau of Chemistry of the Department of Agriculture, is quoted in the newspapers as saying that "more than one million babies had been sacrificed to the various concoctions known as paregorics and pain-killers, and over twice that many were killed by impure milk."

Dr. Wiley was too wily to state in what length of time these three millions of infants were slain, but from the context, the impression is left that he meant annually. If so, the statemenfis too absurd to need confutation.

According to the latest statistics obtainable—the United States census of iooo, the death rate of the country is placed at 17.6 per thousand, which, estimating the population at 80,000,000, would give a total of 1,480,000 deaths annually. If we estimate the total of infantile deaths (•'. e., deaths under 5 years old) at 50% of this total, which is far above the actual figures, it would give us only some 700,000 per annum. Of these, the greater part would be past the age when milk is the staple of existence, and a large proportion of these latter would be nourished at the breast. So we think it can be safely said that there are not more than 100,000 to 200,000 deaths a year, of infants which have been fed on artificial milk foods. Of course, if Dr. Wiley meant, instead of annually, that 3,000,000 infantile deaths have occurred in all time, his figures may be correct, but even then we would like to know where he got his statistics.

"We do not know," continues this garrulous doctor, "anything about the milk that we have left at our houses. or the conditions under which it was produced." If the doctor made this statement (it is a part of the interview telegraphed broadcast over the country), he proclaims himself to be in a state of inexcusable and criminal ignorance. As a physician, on whom the health and lives of others depend, it his duty to know all about the milk supply, not only of his own home, but of his town generally, and as a citizen it is in his power to invoke the authority provided by nearly every municipality in the country to see that the milk supply is kept unpolluted."

If, however, the city governments, near to the people as they are, and familiar as they are with local conditions, can not protect the public from fraudulent food products, is it reasonable to suppose that Dr. Wiley, with the entire country to look after, would be able to entirely eradicate the evil?

Continuing in a similar strain, the doctor declares that "there are a thousand and one possibilities which might have combined to make what nature intended as a food, the most virile poison that chemistry can produce."

This bit of exaggeration is printed in the papers to which the interview was telegraphed in capital letters, a fact that only emphasizes the misstatements contained in it. Science knows of "no possibilities that can convert milk into the most virile poison that chemistry can produce," but false science, fakirism in the name of science, and selfseeking in the garb of philanthropy, by endeavoring to bar all preservatives, can convert it into a substance sufficiently dangerous to human life. To quote further, Dr. Wiley says: "I have found that the foods we daily consume are so fraught with germ life of a harmful nature that I am almost afraid to go to the table. The butter is painted; there is little other to be found anywhere. Canned goods are kept years and sold for the genuine article. I speak particularly of condensed milk. If we know nothing of the fresh milk we get, surely our knowledge is more limited as to the product that is put in cans."

Of course, we cannot know "upon what meat" this Caesar of the Agricultural Department hath fed. or where he buys his groceries, but if his statements are to be believed, his larder is in a most miserable condition. "His butter is painted; there is but little other to be found." That depends upon where one looks, and the object he has in view in looking for it. If he is searching in auction job lots, and with the view of making capital for the advocates of "Pure Food," so-called, possibly he might get butter, stained by some vegetable color. We, in the West, find no difficulty in getting all the pure, fresh, wholesome butter that we want, and that at moderate prices, and we believe the same conditions prevail in the East. The use of the word "painted" in this connection, by-the-by. is a bit of hyperbolism akin to the "embalmed meats" of the Medical Supply Bureau during the Spanish war. Because butter is habitually tinted of a yellow or golden color, to please the eye. it does not at all follow that it is harmful. As to oleomargarine the greatest of hygienists and scientists have de

clared that when properly made it is not only palatable, but nutritious and wholesome. To see that it is properly prepared should be the duty of the inspectors under existing laws on the subject.

Of canned milk against which the next exaggeration of this Agricultural Department expert is directed, we can say that if properly prepared there can be no possible change, whether microbic or chemical, either in one year or fifty. The best possible proof of this is that in the halfcentury or more in' which it has been in use, and the thousand and tens of thousands of millions cans of it that have been sold, there has not been a single fatal case of intoxication from this cause that we have ever heard of. We have never even heard that one has been made seriously ill by it.

Finally, in a burst of piety, the good Dr. Wiley declares that "the Lord intended us to resort to cans only to tide us over one season, until green fruits could be had again, but the canneries don't know this." We do not know where the doctor gets his information as to the Lord's intentions, but supposing that he gets it directly from headquarters. we would only remark that if such were his intentions he should be more careful about sending late frosts to kill off the green fruits and vegetables, and should be more just in the distribution of the supply, so that not only the rich, who are able to pay for them are provided for, but the poor and the needy also.

With this bit of ad captandum cant the doctor closes this remarkable series of exaggerations. Not a single statement attributed to him in the whole article will bear the test of investigation, even the most casual. Yet, this is the man into whose hands as an expert scientist the American people are to be delivered if one of the so-called "Pure Food" bills, now before Congress, shall be erected into a law. He is to be the virtual arbiter of the fortune of every manufacturer of articles of food, drink and medicines. He has endeavored to stir the people to demand, and has stirred the Senate to pass a "pure food" law for the benefit of the "dear people," as he would have us believe, by statements similar to those of which we have just shown the absurdity. The bare thought of giving him such power is monstrous!

50 Years of Vin Mariani- cir 1905

From The Medical Times, A Monthy Journal of Medicine, Surgery, and the Colateral Sciences,
Alfred Kimball Hills, M.D. Editor, New York

There Is a Difference. That there is a distinction in use and abuse, as well as a recognizable difference between a mild wine adapted for the sick, and the promiscuous use of strong drink, cannot be better shown than through the following extract of a recent letter referring to Vin Mariani: "The dangers of alcoholism would be avoided if no other stimulant were taken for mental or physical trials than that offered by the generous Vin Mariani.—Mesureur." The full importance of this will be better appreciated when it is recalled that Mesureur is the Director of Hygiene and Public Health in Paris, France, and it was he was approved and signed the radical governmental posters against alcoholism.

Since M. Mariani first adopted Coca to the exigencies of daily life, when nearly half a century ago he introduced Vin Mariani to the medical profession, it has been his pride to maintain its high standard as it was then presented and accepted by physicians everywhere. So positive was this recognition that endorsements have been showered upon Vin Mariani as a tonic-wine of unfailing excellence. Such testimonials have been appreciated because they were unsolicited expressions of gratification. It is proposed to jealously guard and to perpetuate this distinctive standing.

"A Conspiracy to Establish a Physicians' Trust." We have received a reprint from "The National Druggist" of St. Louis, entitled "The Legislative Schemes of the American Medical Association," with a request for publication. The article is too long for this purpose, but if any of our readers are desirous of perusing this article, they can obtain a copy from the publisher, as above.

Needed Legislation. Increased attention is wisely directed to an alarming extent of sophistication in foods and drugs; the former commonly being contaminated by preservatives which are injurious, and the latter, under guise of harmless remedies, often owing efficacy to dangerous narcotics. This deplorable practice has been officially shown to be so widespread and demoralizing as to demand rigid legislation to protect both the consumer and the reputable merchant.

Several States have framed laws against the falsity of traffic in the commodities essential to life and health, and a bill isnow before the Congress which, if enacted, will afford government protection against such abuse, and, by guarding against misrepresentation by misbranding, will extend authoritative assurance to those who place dependence upon recognized remedies in time of need.

The investigations prompted by state and national measures have necessitated critical examinations of various proprietary preparations as to their purity and fitness. Notable instances of such work were the investigations of the Ohio Pure Food Commission, the State Board of Health of Pennsylvania, and more recently the Illinois Pharmacy Board. In each instance Vin Mariani, analyzed from examples purchased in the open market, was proved to be precisely as represented and in conformity with the strict governmental analysis enacted in France, Germany, Russia and elsewhere in Europe.

This clearly indicated that the high standard of this preparation, established nearly half a century ago, continues unaltered, and is a justification for the distinctive endorsements which physicians everywhere have voluntarily accorded this unique restorative-tonic.

The New Pharmacopoeia.—The eighth decennial revision of the United States Pharmacopoeia, which was due in 1900, became official on September 1, 1905. A number of articles considered obsolete have been dismissed, and nearly an equal number of new substances have been added. An effort has been made to bring tinctures to a uniform 10 per cent, strength, while drugs containing alkaloids must be assayed and brought to a standard before being dispensed. Among the important additions are cocaine and Coca Wine, the recognition of the latter endorsing a flattering tribute to M. Mariana, who was the originator of this preparation which has only now been made official. Coca leaves, according to the U. S. P., must contain 0.5 per cent, of ether soluble alkaloids, by weight, and Fluid Extract of Coca must contain 0.5 grammes of ether soluble alkaloids, by weight, in each cubic centimeter. That means cocaine. Nothing is said of the several other alkaloids contained in Coca which are not soluble in ether. Surely great bodies do move slowly. Cocaine was discovered nearly fifty years ago, and it is an equal number of years ago that M. Mariani first introduced Coca Wine to the medical profession. Notwithstanding the fact that "Vinum Cocae" is now official, physicians who desire the original preparation must carefully specify Mariani in order to obtain the results which have for years been advocated as due to Coca—made available in Vin Mariani.—The Coca Leaf, Sept., 1905.

Always a Leader. Vin Mariani has never been a follower, and has never been driven into set lines. It is unique, and stands alone. From its first inception it was planned upon purely ethical principles. It is a remedy prepared for the medical profession from substances not readily obtainable until presented in the agreeable form offered in this unique tonic. Without legislation to compel the truth it has always stood for precisely what it is represented, a blending of true coca in a nutritious French wine, each half-litre bottle presenting the desirable medicinal constituents of two ounces of fresh coca leaves. Imitators following upon the success of Vin Mariani have attempted to foist upon the profession so-called coca-wines extemporaneously prepared from cocaine and cheap grades of wine. It has not required much investigation to piove their faltity and perniciousness while every effort to malign this standard coca preparation has invariably resulted in strengthening the vast testimony, from every part of the world where medicine is practiced, which has voluntarily endorsed the integrity and usefulness of Vin Mariani.—The Coca Leaf, May

The alkaloidal yield of coca varies with the quality as well as with the variety of leaf used. The large Bolivian leaf being rich in cocaine to the exclusion of the other alkaloids, is employed by chemists for the extraction of cocaine, while the small leaf varieties inversely being low in cocaine and rich in aromatic bodies and those alkaloids which act upon muscle, are employed medicinally for such physiological properties. A blending of these latter varieties of aromatic coca is employed in the preparation of Vin Mariani. It is the refinement of selection of appropriate coca from long years of experience, and skill in its preservation and manufacture, to which this unique tonic owes its restorative properties.—The Coca Leaf, March.

50 Years of Medicine As Seen, May 1907 in Washington, D.C.

EIGHTH ANNUAL MEETING OF THE AMERICAN THERAPEUTIC SOCIETY

http://books.google.com/books?pg=PA607&lpg=PA607&dq=Pharmacopeia%20wiley&sig=-jmDds3bdVtz9YAUrfAh4hHKSwo&ei=3JmcTd_GFLCy0QHH5cXlAg&ct=result&id=0UEBAAAAYAAJ&ots=_X17DNQezk&output=text

Held At Washington, D. C, May 4, 6 And 7,1907.

The address of welcome was delivered by Hon. Henry B. F. Mcfarland, president of the Board of Commissioners for the District of Columbia. Dr. Reynold Webb Wilcox, New York, responded for the visiting members.

Address by the president, Dr. Robert Reyburn, Washington, D. C.

Fifty Years In The Practice Of Medicine.

After speaking of his early medical career, Dr. Reyburn describes the methods of treatment used in the period following the year of his graduation, 1856. Vaccination was performed by pulverizing vaccine crusts and inserting the moistened powder into the arm. The antiphlogistic method of treating inflammation was still in vogue, bleeding, blistering, purging. While no one would wish to revive bleeding after the old methods, yet he had seen cases in which prompt venesection had saved life. In eclampsia, threatened apoplexy and even acute pneumonia, he had seen prompt relief afforded in this way. The antiphlogistic method was followed by a reaction, and in 1860 and 1862, stimulants were given in inflammatory conditions. In 1862 Dr. Reyburn entered the Union Army, and from this point the paper deals largely with surgery. After describing surgical methods in vogue prior to the war, and contrasting them with those of the present day, he interestingly describes his army experiences. »He contrasts the high mortality from gunshot wounds in the Civil War with the low mortality in the SpanishAmerican war. In the latter the universal use of first aid by antiseptic dressings did more than anything else to lessen the mortality. Also, the rifles used were more humane in that they carried a small bullet of high velocity, which penetrated the tissues more readily and caused less shattering than did those of the Civil War. The paper then deals with personal recollections of President Lincoln and of the scenes following his assassination. The address closes with an interesting account of the assassination, illness and death of President Garfield, Dr. Reyburn having been one of the physicians in attendance.

PURE DRUGS.

Dr. Harvey W. Wiley, Washington: After referring to the different classes of therapeutic agents, Dr. Wiley discusses the attempts that have been made to control the purity of drugs used as medicines. Such attempts have been made for many years. The United States Pharmacopeia, National Formulary and United States Dispensatory are efforts along this line. As early as 1848 a federal law was enacted governing the importation of adulterated and spurious medicines. Prior to this there had been established at the port of New York an examiner of drugs. His testimony before the Congressional Committee shows that the character of the drugs imported a half-century ago was far from satisfactory. At least one half of those which entered New York was adulterated or had deteriorated in value. Under the inspection of drugs their character has materially improved. Dr. Wiley was unable to say how far the new Food and Drugs Act will be applied to the inspection of drugs. The question is now before the Attorney-General for decision. If he adopts the common principle of construction, inspection by the Treasury Department will continue as before, with an additional inspection as required by the Act of June 30. 1906. It is probable that at least 20% of the dm trade will be affected by the provisions of the new law. This leaves about forty thousand articles of drugs to which the law does not apply except as to misbranding. He considers the subject of misbranding, the evils which attend the promiscuous sale of preparations of uncertain, unknown, or even questionable composition, and the beneficial effects which have followed proper and correct branding. Individuals who have not the most elementary knowledge of pharmacy or medicine are permitted, under the state and national law, to concoct almost any agent and sell it directly to the consumer. This is in marked contrast with the qualifications necessary for the practice of medicine and pharmacy. He suggests the following as the most effective method of control in this regard: that no one should be allowed to advertise or offer for sale to the pubhV in any community any remedy of any kind who has no: passed an examination before a medical examining board and received a license to dispense medicines and prescribe for patients in the locality mentioned. Thus, the patent medicine trade would be much restricted. After discussing the subject of standardization, the paper closes with an appeal to physicians to write original prescriptions rather than order t he ready-made medicinal preparations.

DISCUSSION.

Db. Reynold Webb Wilcox, New York, spoke of the standards set forth in the Pharmacopeia. Seven years ago he was appointed a member of the revision committee. The aim of the committee had always been to maintain the necessary efficiency and purity of drugs without making the standards so high that manufacturers could not come up to them. They were established after careful study and conferences with manufacturers. After the enactment of the new Pure Food and Drugs Act there came in a flood of protests from manufacturers, who claimed that they could not come up to certain of the standards. This necessitated a reconsideration of the subject, which resulted in revision of the standard in over four hundred instances. Never had the committee failed to lower the standard when it was conclusively shown that it was unreasonably high. He commended Dr. Wiley's work. The aew law was a godsend to the physician, the pharmacist and the public.

Dr. E. H. Long, Buffalo, said that the profession could well rejoice that it had the aid of the government in the matter of drug control. He commended the suggestion by Dr. Wiley relating to a license requirement for those who wish to sell medicinal preparations. He commented upon the prevailing neglect of medical schools to furnish adequate instruction in the art of prescribing and the use of reliable and wellknown remedies. Much could be done along this line to hasten the era of pure drugs.

Dr. Oliver T. Osborne, New Haven, said that now is the time to let the label tell. He related a recent experience at Hartford in an effort to get poison labels on bottles. There was much opposition from pharmacists and others, and finally two strenuous bills were brought before the legislature. Much to his satisfaction, however, the business men agreed at the preliminary hearing that they preferred the provisions of the new Food and Drugs Act. What can be done as to false and misleading advertisements? The Post-office Department must attend to this, as such advertisements are fraudulent and hence should be denied the use of the mails. He expressed regret that young physicians in the hospitals are prone to prescribe compounds which are kept upon the shelves ready-mixed for the sake of convenience. Thus they soon lose the ability to write their own prescriptions. After they leave the hospital they come into contact with the traveling salesman and his proprietary medicines. He made a plea for the writing of original and simple prescriptions.

Dr. F. E. Stewart, East Orange, commended Dr. Wiley's work. The medical profession and the public could not be too grateful for governmental aid. He commended Dr. Wiley's suggestion as to license requirement. Dr. Gould had said that any one can practice medicine without a license except a physician or a pharmacist.

Dr. L. F. Kebler, Washington, related interesting instances in which articles which were misbranded or falsely advertised were brought to the attention of the post-office authorities with the object of having them excluded from the mails. In many instances failure was due to the difference of opinion among the medical witnesses as to the efficacy of the " cure under consideration. He testified as to the dense ignorance of many of the promoters of these "cures and cited instances in illustration.

Dr. Wilet, in closing, said that the Post-office Department had accomplished all that it could under the law. He had always received from it sympathy and help in his work.

SOME CRITICISMS OF THE UNITED STATES PHARMACOPEIA.

Dr. Reynold Webb Wilcox, New York: Dr. Wilcox answers some of the criticisms that have appeared since the last revision became official in 1905:

1. "Many agents have been retained that are not in general use, while others much used have been omitted." As a matter of fact the changes were made only after the committee had consulted manufacturers, wholesale and retail druggists, and the members of the medical profession throughout the land. Every suggestion, no matter how humble its origin, was considered.

2. "More frequent revisions of the pharmacopeia are necessary." A greater frequency would not be possible, because time is needed for definite knowledge of medicinal substances. Active work for nearly five years was required for the present revision and this represents about the shortest time in which the work can be done.

3. "The time has come when the American Medical Association should take a hand in this work." Dr. Wilcox answers this criticism at some length, calling attention to the make-up of the revison committee. The medical profession is represented by 12 out of 26 members. The unfortunate showing which the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry has made also demonstrates the utter unfitness of the American Medical Association to undertake the far more serious work of revision of the Pharmacopeia.

• DISCUSSION.

Dr. L. F. Kebler, Washington, agreed with Dr. Wilcox as to the status of the United States Pharmacopeia. He knew of none equal to our own. It unquestionably has faults, but they will be remedied as fast as practicable. He could not see the justice of the criticisms mentioned in the paper. He expressed regret that Dr. Wilcox had so severely criticised the Council. It had already accomplished something, and for this it deserved credit. It could reach some things that the federal law could not. Already it had exposed a number of frauds; the members were working harmoniously together for a good end.

Dr. F. E. Stewart, East Orange, also expressed regret that Dr. Wilcox had criticised the Council so severely. It was doing a good work and was attempting to solve some of the most difficult problems in existence.

Dr. S. L. Dawes, Albany, referred to the nomenclature used in the Pharmacopeia. The names of remedies are in many instances too long and complex. They could be simplified to good advantage. Students who are taught long and complex names for drugs soon discard them after graduation for simpler terms. After graduation young physicians are apt to lapse from the high standards set for them in the medical schools. He thought this a valid criticism of the Pharmacopeia. Simplify the nomenclature.

Dr. E. H. Long, Buffalo, said that we should not take the position of condemning the Council. We should remember the short time that it has been in existence. Though young, it has already done some . The Pharmacopeia, on the other hand, has in existence since 1820. It can stand severe criticism. The more one comes into contact with the members of the revision committee, the more he sympathizes with them in their work. He was in favor of a simpler nomenclature.

Dr. Oliver T. Osborne, New Haven, said he hardly found his prescription blanks long enough for some of the terms he had to use. He suggested that accent marks be used in the next Pharmacopeia in order to secure uniformity in pronunciation. He commended the work of the Council.

Dn. Wilcox, in closing, said that perhaps his criticism of the Council had been rather too severe. Destructive criticism is not always advisable; constructive criticism is often productive of good. His was intended to be of the latter type. He fully appreciated the magnitude of the task before the Council. It had simply undertaken to do more than it could. He favored a simpler nomenclature, and agreed that the matter of pronunciation should receive attention in the next Pharmacopeia.

LEGAL CONTROL NECESSARY IN THE TREATMENT OF DRUG HABITS.

Dr. Frederick H. Gerrish, Portland, Me.: After speaking of the wide prevalence of drug habits, Dr. Gerrish emphasizes the futility of depending upon the victim's will power. Physical restraint is necessary in almost every case. And yet if the physician interferes with the freedom of action of the victim, even with his consent, he makes himself liable to a subsequent suit for false imprisonment. The only way to reconcile the conflicting interests of physician and patient is by the enactment of a law by which the victim can relinquish his freedom long enough to ensure a cure. Such a law was enacted in Maine in 1905. Dr. Gerrish had heard no complaints that its workings were other than salutary. The paper closes with a statement of the law.

{To be continued.)

THE PHYSICIAN'S CONNECTION WITH PROPRIETARY REMEDIES

http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/XLIX/19/1586.extract?sid=c13c0a93-34f9-46d2-a8d3-0ba474fe6901

H. Wiley, M.D.

Read in the Section on Pharmacology and Therapeutics of the American Medical Association, at the Fifty-eighth Annual Session, held at Atlantic City, June, 1907. ...

An important ethical principle attaches to the physician's relations to proprietary remedies. These remedies may be of two kinds. First, remedies whose composition is disclosed and which are true to the formulas or names by which they are known. Such remedies become proprietary articles by reason of invention, discovery or purchase. There is another kind of proprietary remedy which becomes so by reason of secrecy. As a rule these latter kind do not contain any new principle or substance, but make use of well-known remedial agents, simple or mixed in a more or less haphazard way, and to which some fancy or trade name is given.

It is easy to see that a proprietary remedy may in itself as a remedial agent be good, bad or indifferent. There is no reason to doubt the fact that the activity of any drug or remedy will be as great when administered in

THE PHARMACOPEIA AS A LEGAL STANDARD

http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/LI/24/2020.extract

Read in the Section on Pharmacology and Therapeutics of the American Medical Association, at the Fifty-ninth Annual Session, held at Chicago, June, 1908. ...

excerpt

Many years before the publication of the first edition of the United States Pharmacopeia it was recognized by the leaders of the medical and pharmaceutical professions that standards for potent well-known drugs were highly desirable, if not absolutely necessary for the proper treatment of human ailments. Tangible evidence of this feeling was manifested by the publication of a number of books by various authors which contained standards or descriptions of drug products of much value. The first edition of the Pharmacopeia appeared in 1820 and was immediately voluntarily accepted as the proper guide by both professions. Successive editions appeared decennially; and Congress in 1848 recognized this authority as the legal standard for drugs imported into the United States in the following language:

If, on examination, any drugs, medicines, medicinal preparations, whether chemical or otherwise, including medicinal essential oils, are found, in the opinion of the examiner, to be so far

Harvey Wiley's 1906 U.S. Food & Drugs Act Key Points

Wiley is now made chief inspector, chief examiner, instigator of the charge, prosecutor, jury and judge; and if any manufacturer dares cry out against such an unjust condition he is met with the cry from Wiley and the Wiley press: "He is an adulteror and a dopester..." And all this power in the hands of a man who says: "I am the spirit and essence of the pure food and drug law, and without me there would be no law." - The American Food Journal, February 15, 1912, cited at p 109 of For God, Country and Coca Cola by Mark Pendergrast

SEC. 4

That the examinations of specimens of foods and drugs shall be made in the Bureau of chemistry of the Department of Agriculture, or under the direction and supervision of such Bureau, for the purpose of determining from such examinations whether such articles are adulterated or misbranded within the meaning of this Act; and if it shall appear from any such examination that any of such specimens is adulterated or misbranded within the meaning of this act, the Secretary of Agriculture shall cause notice thereof to be given to the party from whom such sample was obtained. Any party so notified shall be given an opportunity to be heard, under such rules and regulations as may be prescribed as aforesaid, and if it appears that any of the provisions of this act have been violated by such party, then the Secretary of Agriculture shall at once certify the facts to the proper United States district attorney, with a copy of the results of the analysis or the examination of such article duly authenticated by the analyst or officer making such examination, under the oath of such officer. After judgment of the court, notice shall be given by publication in such manner as may be prescribed by the rules and regulations aforesaid.

[IOW who ever was in Wiley's position as Chief Chemist at the US Department of Agriculture could declare a substance "bad" and thus ban it from interstate commerce]

SEC.6

That the term “drug,” as used in this Act, shall include all medicines and preparations recognized in the United States Pharmacopoeia or National Formulary for internal or external use, and any substance or mixture of substances intended to be used for the cure, mitigation, or prevention of disease of either man or other animals. The term “food,” as used herein, shall include all articles used for food, drink, confectionery, or condiment by man or other animals, whether simple, mixed, or compound.

[IOW "drugs" excluding Tobacco, since it was dropped from the USP in 1905- a mere one year earlier as if perhaps in anticipation of the 1906 Act; and "foods" which would technically exclude Tobacco as the plant matter is considered too toxic to actually swallow]


SEC. 7

That for the purposes of this Act an article shall be deemed to be adulterated:

In case of drugs:

First. If, when a drug is sold under or by a name recognized in the United States Pharmacopoeia or National formulary, it differs from the standard of strength, quality, or purity, as determined by the test laid down in the United States Pharmacopoeia or National Formulary official at the time of investigation: Provided, That no drug defined in the United States Pharmacopoeia or National Formulary shall be deemed to be adulterated under this provision if the standard of strength, quality, or purity be plainly stated upon the bottle, box, or other container thereof although the standard may differ from that determined by the test laid down in the United States Pharmacopoeia or National Formulary.

Second. If its strength or purity fall below the professed standard or quality under which it is sold.

In the case of confectionery:

If it contains terra alba, barites, talc, chrome yellow, or other mineral substance or poisonous color or flavor, or other ingredient deleterious or detrimental to health, or any vinous, malt or spirituous liquor or compound or narcotic drug.

[IOW- anything containing what the USDA wished to supress, without of course any backing science]

In the case of food:

First. If any substance has been mixed and packed with it so as to reduce or lower or injuriously affect its quality or strength.

Second. If any substance has been substituted wholly or in part for the article.

Fifth. If it contain any added poisonous or other added deleterious ingredient which may render such article injurious to health: Provided, That when in the preparation of food products for shipment they are preserved by any external application applied in such manner that the preservative is necessarily removed mechanically, or by maceration in water, or otherwise, and directions for the removal of said preservative shall be printed on the covering or the package, the provisions of this act shall be construed as applying only when said products are ready for consumption.

[IOW- anything containing what the USDA wished to supress, without of course any backing science]

SEC. 8

That the term “misbranded,” as used herein, shall apply to all drugs, or articles of food, or articles which enter into the composition of food, the package or label of which shall bear any statement, design, or device regarding such article, or the ingredients or substances contained therein which shall be false or misleading in any particular, and to any food or drug product which is falsely branded as the State, territory, or country in which it is manufactured or produced.

That for the purposes of this Act an article shall also be deemed to be misbranded:

In the case of Drugs:

First. If it be an imitation of or offered for sale under the name of another article.

Second. If the contents of the package as originally put up shall have been removed, in whole or in part, and other contents shall have been placed in such package, or if the package fail to bear a statement on the label of the quantity or proportion of any alcohol, morphine, opium, cocaine, heroin, alpha or beta eucaine, chloroform, cannabis indica, chloral hydrate, or acetanilide, or any derivative or preparation of any such substances contained therein

In the case of food:

First. If it be an imitation of or offered for sale under the distinctive name of another article.

Second. If it be labeled or branded so as to deceive or mislead the purchaser, or purport to be a foreign product when not so, or if the contents of the package as originally put up shall have been removed in whole or in part and other contents shall have been placed in such package, or if it fail to bear a statement on the label of the quantity or proportion of any morphine, opium, cocaine, heroin, alpha or beta eucaine, chloroform, cannabis indica, chloral hydrate, or acetanilide, or any derivative or preparation of any such substances contained therein.


[IOW- anything containing what the USDA wished to supress, without of course any backing science- thereby allowing the USDA to serve its first and foremost role as a protector of U.S. domestic agriculture, thereby allowing them to demonifiy say "cocaine" while ignoring/protecting "caffeine" and "nicotine" - AGRICULTURAL MERCANTILISM]

Harvey Washington Wiley Paradox

No explaination why Wiley, who served as the USDA Chief Chemist from 1883-1912, who admitted in 1922 that he recognized Tobacco's deleterious qualities within his first month of smoking at an unspecified time in the past, had fought so hard for a 1906 U.S. Food and Drug Act granting him the power to declare substances dangerous or deleterious to human health, yet limited to substances contained in the U.S. Pharmacopoeia, from which Tobacco had been conveniently deleted one year earlier in 1905.

http://freedomofmedicineanddiet.blogspot.com/2011/04/protect-growing-youth-against-habit.html

What does tobacco do to us? There is in it a poison called nicotine so deadly that one full drop of it would kill an adult. A smaller portion of it taken for the first time by a boy makes him deathly sick. That gives warning of its poisonous character, but doesn't usually wean him from the folly. It did not in my case, for I speak as an ex-smoker. I quit at the end of my first week, after.

I had got over the nausea and had begun to enjoy "a good cigar." But I had already discovered that tobacco would hobble my brain and lead others to follow my bad example. Tobacco of any kind puts a soft-pedal on efficiency of mind and body. It puts us in a state of narcosis. We are half chloroformed.


http://www.goodhousekeeping.com/product-testing/history/about-harvey-wiley

It's a sweet story: Honey turned Harvey Wiley, M.D., the Institute's longtime Director of Food, Sanitation, and Health, into a passionate consumer advocate. Born in 1844, Wiley fought in the Civil War, went to medical school, then taught chemistry. In 1878, fiddling with a polariscope, a device for measuring stress in glass, Wiley examined various transparent foods and was shocked to learn that what companies were passing off as pure honey was mainly glucose. Thus began his lifelong campaign against mislabeled and dangerous products. He spent 29 years as the chief of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Bureau of Chemistry, where he fought for the passage of the 1906 Pure Food and Drugs Act. At GH from 1912 to 1930, he alerted readers to food frauds such as the treatment of spoiled vegetables with chemicals to "revive" them. In 1911, Wiley sued Coca-Cola for failing to label the soda as containing habit-forming caffeine. He lost the headline-making case, but it paved the way for future truth-in-labeling laws.

Read more: Dr. Harvey Wiley Original Doctor at the Good Housekeeping Research Institute - Good Housekeeping


http://www.goodhousekeeping.com/product-testing/history/good-housekeeping-research-institute-timeline

1916: We begin speaking out against the dangers of smoking and the effect advertising has in recruiting new smokers. "Unfortunately, there are many subtle ways of encouraging young men to smoke," writes Dr. Wiley. "Hundreds of thousands of dollars are spent every year in telling the readers of periodicals of the merits of this, that, and the other brand of tobacco."

1921: Dr. Wiley links tobacco use to heart disease, noting that men smoke more and so suffer more heart disease than women. Seven years later, he warns women that use of tobacco is a cause of mouth, tongue, and throat cancer, more than 30 years before the U.S. Surgeon General officially acknowledges the connection.

1952: When European studies confirm that smoking causes cancer, GH bans cigarette advertising in the magazine — 12 years before the U.S. Surgeon General's pivotal report on the health hazards of tobacco, and 18 years before the Surgeon General's warning appears on cigarette packs. In 1978, GH's early antismoking efforts are commended by the American Cancer Society.

Read more: Good Housekeeping Research Institute Timeline – History of Consumer Advocacy - Good Housekeeping