[Skip to Navigation]
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.
October 3, 1959


Author Affiliations

University of Pennsylvania University Hospital Philadelphia 4.

JAMA. 1959;171(5):592. doi:10.1001/jama.1959.03010230090024

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.


To the Editor:—  Swarts and Rourke (J.A.M.A.170:1409 [July 18] 1959) maintain that the selfadministration of Aqua Ivy tablets for prophylaxis of Rhus dermatitis is hazardous. Four members of one family developed cutaneous reactions after one tablet on three alternate days, and another patient developed purpura and joint swelling after a similar dose.I dissent strongly from the above-mentioned incrimination of Aqua Ivy as the cause of these reactions. Although I believe that this agent is not very helpful in prophylaxis, I am even more certain that it is essentially harmless. In my experience, Aqua Ivy is a weak antigen. None of my patients has complained of untoward effects when the tablets are used in the prescribed way. Lack of sidereactions is the outstanding quality which separates Aqua Ivy from the more potent Rhus allergens that I have studied experimentally (A.M.A. Arch. Dermat.78:47 [July] 1958). Furthermore, large

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