I am also aware that no effort has been made to clarify the subject. Either this has seemed impossible or unnecessary; certainly it has not been done.

The question may be asked at this juncture, Why is it necessary that a homœopathic practitioner should know anything about primary and secondary drug action? The reply is, So that he may know when to prescribe a high and when a low dilution. To illustrate: A drug has been proved in the sixth or third decimal dilution, certain results, conditions and symptoms, have followed; similar symptoms appear in a patient to whom we are called; what dilution should be prescribed? Surely we would not give anything lower than the dilution from which the pathogenetic symptoms were obtained, because experience has shown that the average approximately healthy prover requires more drug substance to produce results, than does an individual suffering from some perversion of health, and consequently the proper dilution to give would be one containing even less material than the one with which the proving was made. To give an example: Suppose we have a patient who is suffering from depression of the vital forces, a contracted pupil darkly flushed face, coldness of the surface, stupor with stertorous breathing being concomitant, we would not give opium in grain doses, but a smaller amount would be administered than is required to produce the similimum of such a condition in the experimenter. On the other hand, suppose we have a case of delirium, with frightful and distressing visions, anxiety and fear of impending death, together with sleeplessness and acuteness of hearing (all being symptoms which are believed to have been caused by infinitesimal doses of opium), we would not prescribe a dose of the drug containing more material than was contained in the dilution which produced these symptoms. in the experimenter, but would give even a higher dilution. That is, we would do it if we wished to prescribe in accordance with the law of similars.

I have mentioned opium several times as illustrative of the principle involved, simply because we know more of the extreme effects of this drug than we do of many others. In many instances opium can be applied according to the views I have expressed, but further experiments are needed with opium to more clearly emphasize the finer details of experiments with both the crude drug and the dilutions.

I trust I have made clear this question of the effects of material doses on the one hand, and of dilutions on the other; as, for example, the tincture in the one instance and the sixth dilution in

It may, however, be asked, What about the effects of the intermediate dilutions, that border-land in which is found evidences of action and re-action so hopelessly confused? Herein, it must be confessed, we are confronted by a problem which at first. glance seems almost impossible of solution; but obstacles frequently seem insurmountable until we undertake to grapple with them, when the difficulties vanish. I do not, however, claim that the suggestion I am about to offer will solve this question to the satisfaction of all, but it is my idea of a solution, and I offer it for what it is worth. When a drug is given in what is known as a "full dose" (e. g., opium, two grains), certain results follow; when a smaller amount is given less decided results follow, which are similar in kind though not in degree. This similarity in kind of results continues as the experimental dose is diminished, until a point is reached when results which are even similar in kind no longer appear, but results bearing an ever lessening degree of similarity present themselves and continue to develop, until as the ultimatum we have a condition existing which is diametrically opposite to the condition manifested as a result of the full dose of the drug. It is this variance in degree of resemblance of the general effects of different degrees of drug dilutions, which renders a proving of a drug made with a variety of dilutions so contradictory and confusing. Furthermore, another reason why such a mixed result proving is confused and confusing is, because not only are so many degrees of pathogenetic drug similarity recorded as from one cause, but the manifestations of the primary or active condition of the organism is recorded in conjunction with the secondary or passive condition of the organism; we therefore have constipation and diarrhoea both recorded without any clue as to which was the result of a low potency or which was the result of a high potency; we have anorexia and bulimia similarly recorded, thirst and thirstlessness, dilated pupils and contracted pupils, diuresis and anuresis, cold skin and hot skin, etc., etc., etc., to the end of the chapter.

How is all this to be remedied?

The remedy is quite simple; so simple, indeed, that we wonder why such defects have not long ago been remedied, nay, we even wonder why our provers ever fell into such confusion in experimenting with drugs. In the first place I would suggest, as I have already suggested, that no group of experimenters should test more than one preparation of a drug at the same time. As many experiments may be made as the conductor of the tests may desire, but let no member of a given group of provers use any other dilution than the one in

process of proving by all the other members of the same group. Use the fluid extract, the tincture, or any other preparation preferred, but use none other during that experiment.

This is the first rule, and the second is, that after the individual experimenter has recorded certain definite results from the drug under test, he shall make a separate record for all symptoms which appear to contradict the symptoms first recorded. It may be that some provers will have but one set of symptoms (call them primary if you wish), but some will have two separate and distinctly opposite groups of symptoms and conditions.

Furthermore, I do not believe it is necessary to complicate the work of drug tests by proving such a great variety of preparations of the same drug. I believe all that is reliable of drug effects will be secured by testing the crude drug substance, and one other preparation ranging from the third to the twelfth decimal. (Experimental tests must prove the dilution best suited to the average prover.) From the crude drug I would expect to derive what are generally known as primary symptoms, and from the selected dilution I would expect to secure what are known as secondary symptoms. I am well aware of the difficulties which must attend the effort to decide upon a single dilution as the preparation for general use in proving drugs, both because of the fact that drugs vary as to their qualification for infinitesimal subdivision and also because some individuals are more susceptible to various influences than others, but I believe it will be possible to decide upon a proper dilution for each drug, which dilution will produce the effects desired in the prover of average susceptibility. It is, of course, the prover of average susceptibility we most desire for pathogenetic drug tests; the idiosyncratic individual should be classified separately.

In my opinion the foregoing views applied to the critical testing of drugs upon the voluntary experimenter, will go far towards the discovery of the law upon which we may be able to depend in prescribing the proper dilution of drugs for the ailments to which flesh is heir; and if it is possible to formulate such a law it is through work in this direction that the end will be attained.

A more than ordinary degree of forethought was displayed by a lady, formerly of Staten Island, but now deceased, whose will is at present the subject of legal proceedings. In order to avoid the most. common legal grounds for setting aside testamentary documents she subjected her mental condition to the investigation of five expert alienists, who became witnessess to her will, and certified to her soundness of mind.

THE

A NEW STERILIZER, THE HYGEIA,*

DEVISED BY WM. MORE DECKER, M.D.

Kingston, New York.

HE accompanying cut, with description of parts, gives a correct impression of the Hygeia Sterilizer. It was designed to be used in connection with the Hygeia Nursing Bottle, which consists of two parts; namely, an open cell receptacle, which is

cleaned as easily as a goblet; and a breast-nipple, having the form of a woman's breast, and as easily I cleaned inside as out. For naturalness, simplicity, and cleanliness the Hygeia nursing device is un-excelled.

Milk is Pasteurized in the Hygeia

R-Reservoir: C-Cover; W-Water-gauge : SSupport for Rack: T-Thermometer: K-Water cup for Thermometer: Z-Water-tap : X-Rack: Sterilizer as follows: Fill the cells H-Handle; B-Cell; A-Sterilizing-cap for Cell; P-The Same corked with cotton. 'with milk. Cork the sterilizingcaps (A) with cotton, and adjust them over the cells. Put water in the reservoir until it comes to the mark on the water-gauge (W), that corresponds to the number of cells to be sterilized. Place the cells in the rack (X), and lower it in the reservoir until it rests on the supports (S). Then cover the sterilizer and put it over a source of heat. The thermometer (T) in the water-cup (K) records the temperature of the milk by the temperature of the water. The water is heated to 160°, or 165° F., and that temperature is maintained for 10 minutes, which completely Pasteurizes the milk.

The milk should now be cooled as rapidly as possible. This is accomplished by uncovering the sterilizer and placing it under the cold water faucet, and let the water flow into the reservoir, as rapidly as it overflows the water-cup (K), until the milk is cooled to the temperature of the water. The rack of milk is then lifted out of the sterilizer and conveyed to the refrigerator, where it is left until required for feeding.

The unique and excellent points in the Hygeia Sterilizer are:Ist. The use of cells instead of bottles, thereby obtaining simplicity in construction and cleanliness. The cells are the same as those used for the Hygeia Nursing Device; and when a cell of milk is required for feeding, remove the cap (A) and put a breast-nipple

on the cell.

* Written especially for the NORTH AMERICAN.

2d. The rack, which is a flat plate with openings through it for the cells, supports the cells by the flange about their mouths, and the rack rests on the supports (S), so that the cells are SUSPENDED in a water-bath, and the rack is ABOVE the water. The advantages of this plan are, that it prevents water from swashing on the cotton in the caps; it lessens radiation and conduction of heat from the water; and it makes room at the base of the sterilizer for cold storage.

3d. The water-gauge (W), which gauges the amount of water by the number of cells to be sterilized.

4th. The water-cup (K) and special thermometer (T), so that the temperature of the milk is determined without uncovering the sterilizer, and the cup is a vent for water in cooling the milk, or in keeping it cool with ice stored in the sterilizer. The out-flow of water, by way of the water-cup, prevents submerging the caps.

5th. The sterilizer is easily handled in one hand, therefore it is conveniently portable. It is also adapted to the transportation of milk, and for keeping it cool at home or on a journey.

The Hygeia Nursing Device has been IMPROVED by venting the breast and doing away with the wire rack, and the price has been reduced to thirty (30) cents.

The Sterilizer and Nursing Device are manufactured by the Hygeia Nursing Bottle Co., New Bedford, Mass., and they are sold by all druggists.

TABLETS.*

BY WILLIAM ERWIN, M.D.

Walter's Park, Pa.

T can not be disputed that the mild and pleasant medicines of Homœopathy have spurred the Old School physician and his pharmacist to their utmost endeavors to produce elegant prescriptions, those which shall be as pleasant as possible to the eye, and to the senses of smell and taste as well. In this laudable effort at competition many improvements have been made; fairly respectable old school prescriptions, as regards appearance and palatability, are now so common as to be almost the rule, and disagreeable ones more and more the rare exception.

The extreme care necessary to obtain absolute purity in homœopathic medicines has necessitated also the greatest cleanliness and accuracy of manipulation, with the very natural result of close atten

* Written especially for the NORTH AMERICAN