SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Nostrums”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3Linked to original sources

PubMed2002

From Lydia Pinkham to Bob Dole: what the changing face of direct-to-consumer drug advertising reveals about the professionalism of medicine.

From its founding in 1847, the AMA divided drugs into "ethical" and "unethical" preparations. Those that were ethical had a known composition and were advertised only to the profession. Other, patent medicines (technically proprietary drugs, whose trademarks were protected by copyright), were sold directly to the public. In spite of the AMA's efforts to ban the advertising and sale of those nostrums, proprietary drugs flourished during the nineteenth century. Starting in 1900, however, three major societal trends combined to bolster the AMA's campaign, and by 1920 almost all advertising was directed to physicians, who would then prescribe medications to their patients. This ban on advertising pharmaceuticals directly to the public remained virtually unchanged until approximately 1980. Since then, it has slowly eroded and, as recently as 1997, the FDA created guidelines for pharmaceutical companies to advertise on television. What does this change say about the profession of medicine, the role of the physician in society, and the doctor-patient relationship? Using a comparative historical approach, this paper examines these issues.

Advertising↗

PubMed2006

Icons of dentistry: Dr Leon Eisenbud.

Dentistry has a long, often well documented history. Evidence of tooth pullings has been discovered in crude carvings on the walls of caves that are over 10,000 years old. The ancient Egyptians, the Athenians, and the early inhabitants of Rome required oral health care; in addition to tooth extractions, they underwent tumor removal, tamponade for hemorrhage, reduction of jaw fractures with gold wire ligatures, cautery using white hot platinum loops, and an additional variety of remedies and nostrums. Pain relief was offered, with courses of treatment as varied as postural change, alteration of ambient temperature, and vegetable and organic medicines in poultices or via oral and rectal routes. Through the centuries, great surgeons and physicians introduced various methods of treatment: Hippocrates codified ethical standards; Maimonides established pragmatic rules for physicians; LeFort categorized facial fractures; Pasteur clarified the need for sterilization; Semmelweis standardized antiseptic conditions in the operating theater; Morton and Wells discovered safer methods of analgesia; Freud explored the theraupeutic uses of narcotics; Roentgen championed X-ray imaging; Curie pioneered the use of chemotherapy; and Barton and Nightingale were models of empathy and patient care. In more recent times, we have profited from the genius of Watson and Crick (DNA); Fleming (penicillin); Venable and Stuck (Chrome-cobalt--molybdenum alloy); Gershkoff and Goldberg (the subperiosteal implant); Chercheve, Branemark, Linkow, Misch, Tatum, and Niznick (innovative root forms, titanium and its alloys, and sinus floor grafting). The 20th century has brought to us phenomenal imaging, breathtaking intrauterine fetal surgery, wildly promising stem cell research, and astonishing CADCAM techniques. We've had great teachers and clinicians who have introduced us to new forms of therapy and advanced methods, including the role of the hemidesmasomes, the essential elements of bone grafting, the importance of microscopic analysis, and the benefits to patients of physical diagnosis by their dentists. To recognize and celebrate some of my heroes' contributions to the health and well-being of humankind, editorials will occasionally appear on these pages that explore their various contributions.

Dental Service, Hospital↗

PubMed2000

Post-modern drug evaluation. The deconstruction of evidence-based regulation.

Traditionally in medicine, nearly all prescribing decisions were made by the treating physician. The patient had relatively little input and hardly any access to alternative sources of information bearing on that decision; the cost of the prescription was covered by the patient or by an insurer, and neither was likely to provide any feedback to the physician to shape his or her decision. Now, all that has changed. Beginning with the consumerist movement of recent decades and culminating in the explosion of health-related information on the Internet, patients are increasingly vocal participants in the prescribing decision, on both clinical and economic grounds. Payers have become participants as well, and increasingly seek to influence prescribing decisions in the light of their own economic imperatives. Added to all these cross-currents is an additional wild card: the proliferation of 'alternative medicines,' 'nutraceuticals' and other nostrums that society has placed beyond the reach of the evidence-based discourse and regulations that govern conventional drug therapy. In a country where patients struggle to cover the cost of prescription therapies proven both safe and effective in rigorous clinical trials, billions of dollars per year are spent on alternative treatments in the US, unencumbered by concerns about whether they actually work or that they might be toxic. While these patterns of communication, education, disinformation and economic influence are much more chaotic than those that prevailed in the 'good old days,' this very ferment may also present opportunities for improvement of rational pharmacotherapy and public health. This paper briefly outlines the above changes in patterns of communication and influence as they relate to medication use in today's industrialised world (particularly the US), and suggests both hopeful and terrifying scenarios describing where these trends might lead in the coming decade.

Community Participation↗

PubMed1990

Radithor and the era of mild radium therapy.

Soon after the discovery of radium, a school of practitioners arose who were interested primarily in the physiological rather than the tumoricidal powers of this new radioactive element. This treatment philosophy was called "mild radium therapy" and involved the oral or parenteral administration of microgram quantities of radium and its daughter isotopes, often as cures for rheumatic diseases, hypertension, and metabolic disorders. Manufacturers of patent medicines responded to this market by producing a variety of over-the-counter radioactive preparations including pills, elixirs, and salves. One such nostrum was Radithor, a popular and expensive mixture of radium 226 and radium 228 in distilled water. Radithor was advertised as an effective treatment for over 150 "endocrinologic" diseases, especially lassitude and sexual impotence. Over 400,000 bottles, each containing over 2 muCi (74 kBq) of radium, were apparently marketed and sold worldwide between 1925 and 1930. The death of the Pittsburgh millionaire sportsman Eben M. Byers, who was an avid Radithor user, by radium poisoning in 1932 brought an end to this era and prompted the development of regulatory controls for all radiopharmaceuticals.

Alpha Particles↗

PubMedDate not supplied