Scinovex
article Open Access

THE UNITED STATES PHARMACOPEIA.

Journal of the American Medical Association · 1908 · Vol. L(1) · pp. 30–30

Abstract

It is not my present purpose to add to the many reviews or criticisms of the Pharmacopeia, but to call attention to two conditions, hoping that steps may be taken by this Section looking to their improvement. The first is the general loss of interest on the part of physicians in the revision of the Pharmacopeia. The Pharmacopeia was called into being by physicians in 1820, and in 1850 pharmacists were admitted to the convention; since then physicians have gradually relinquished control to pharmacists, and to-day we are confronted with an anomalous condition, in that the committee of revision of 1900, consisting of twenty-five men, numbered nineteen pharmacists or men identified with pharmaceutic institutions, and but six whose interests were entirely with medicine. For example, Dr. Squibb was almost universally known as a manufacturing pharmacist. Only ten members of the committee of revision had the title of M.D. This condition

Historical Medical Research and TreatmentsPharmaceutical studies and practicesPharmaceutical Practices and Patient OutcomesMedicinePharmacistConventionFamily medicineSection (typography)LawPharmacyPolitical science

MeSH terms

Pharmacopoeias as TopicUnited StatesHistory, 19th CenturyHistory, 20th Century
Citations
1,259
FWCI
0.00
field-weighted impact
References
0
Percentile
10%
vs. same field & year
Citations per year
Cited by
Pharmaceutical Applications of Polymorphism
Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences · 1969 · 849 citations
Solid-state study of polymorphic drugs: carbamazepine
Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Analysis · 2000 · 284 citations
Citation Network

How this paper connects to the literature. Drag to explore, click any node to open that paper.