[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
February 7, 1925


JAMA. 1925;84(6):443-444. doi:10.1001/jama.1925.02660320035016

The Journal and the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry are sometimes accused, particularly by those who may profit from the antagonistic point of view, of being unprogressive, or even intolerant with respect to some of the claims of so-called endocrinology. The scientific attitude is not unsympathetic toward activities that indicate real progress or toward products that offer at least a reasonable expectation of merit. However, any one would have to be oblivious to the history of medicine who would fail to realize the uselessness, if not actual harm, that may attend the enthusiastic exploitation of agencies that cannot meet the tests of rigorous examination. We are usually content to favor some recognition of whatever in the domain of therapeutic innovation gives a reasonably promising account of itself, since there are many features of scientific discovery that call for extensive clinical application under diverse conditions before a final decree of usefulness

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview