On the antagonism between medicines and between remedies and diseases : being the Cartwright Lectures for the year 1880 / by Roberts Bartholow.

  • Bartholow, Roberts, 1831-1904.
Date:
1881
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: On the antagonism between medicines and between remedies and diseases : being the Cartwright Lectures for the year 1880 / by Roberts Bartholow. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    25/148 (page 19)
    are similar to those of physostigma, and that it is like the latter, also, in being an antagonist to atropia. In 18G9 the remarkable memoir of Dr. Oscar Liebreich, * * * § in which he announced the dis- covery of chloral, appeared, and soon after the same author de- monstrated the antagonism of chloral and strychnia. A notable event, in connection with the history of this sub- ject, was the appointment of a committee by the British Medical Association “to investigate the antagonism of medicines.” f The committee was composed of Dr. J. H. Bennett, the great Edin- burgh clinician, Dr. McKendrick, physiologist, and Dr. Alexander Bennett. Their researches included the supposed antagonism of strychnia and chloral; atropia and Calabar bean ; chloral and Cala- bar bean ; muriate and meconate of morphia and Calabar bean; sulphate of atropia and meconate of morphia ; theine, caffeine, and guaranine and meconate of morphia ; Calabar bean and strychnia; and bromal hydrate and atropia. The next year, Dr. Milner Fothergill \ made a report to the British Medical Association on the antagonism of aconite and digitalis. Soon after the introduc- tion of pilocarpus (jaborandi) and the isolation of its alkaloid— pilocarpin—the antagonism of this agent with atropia was shown by Yulpian. § An extensive research into the general subject of physiological antagonisms, and including special investigations into the antagonisms of chloral, was lately undertaken by Professor Husemann, the results being published in 1877. Besides these, several memoirs of a polemical character have appeared within a few years past. Of these I may mention the papers of KnapsteinJ Heubach,T and Kay,** in addition to those already referred to. To such importance, indeed, has this subject attained, that no research into the physiological action of a remedy is complete until its range of antagonisms has been, determined. From this brief history of the rise and development of the subject, we may now turn to the examination of the facts which support the doctrine of the antagonistic action of remedies. As * “Das Chloral Hydrat, ein ncues Hypnoticura und Anaesthoticum,” etc Berlin 1869. ’ f “Brit. Med. Jour.,” Jan. 26, 1875. [Report of the Committee.] % Ibid., 1876. § “ Gaz. Hebdom.,” 6, 1876, p. 81. || Knapatein, Adam, “Berlin, klin. Woch.,” 47, 1878, p. 691. T “Arch. f. experiment. Pathol, u. Pharmacol.,” Band viii, p. 31. ** C. Chr. Kay, “ Ucbcr den Antngonismua zwischen Opium und Belladonna.” Inau<\ Disa., Jena, 1866.