[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]
Other Articles
June 24, 1950


JAMA. 1950;143(8):744-745. doi:10.1001/jama.1950.02910430036014

Several months ago the Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry analyzed the published data for the use of antihistaminic agents for colds.1 At the same time The Journal criticised some of the promotional efforts to promote these remedies as cures and as abortive and preventive measures.2 Evidence at that time was lacking to justify such promotional ballyhoo.

Nevertheless the Council and The Journal were roundly berated for expressing their beliefs. An editorial in Collier's magazine was particularly critical of these efforts to bring some sanity into the advertising claims. The editorial was so phrased that the majority of its readers would be left with the thought that the editorial writer at least believed that the criticisms from the American Medical Association were based on greed, that they had been offered in an attempt to prevent persons with colds from deserting their physicians for these new pills. Such an unjustified