[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
January 6, 1923


JAMA. 1923;80(1):37-38. doi:10.1001/jama.1923.02640280039019

Hexamethylenamin, first introduced under various proprietary names, has at length joined the large and growing group of drugs of which much has been expected and still more promised in a therapeutic way, but which have failed to justify the hopes of their champions. It cannot be said that too little time has elapsed to permit a correct evaluation of the claims for hexamethylenamin, since a quarter of a century or more has intervened since the earliest announcement of its possible therapeutic significance. The drug owes its action entirely to the liberation of the antiseptic formaldehyd, a reaction now known to occur only in acid solutions. Hexamethylenamin itself is not actively antiseptic. The use to which it is still devoted with apparent scientific justification is in preventing the growth of micro-organisms in the urinary tract, and in destroying them when they are present in the urine during infectious diseases, such as