This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.
June 16, 1909.
To the Editor:
—The article in The Journal, June 12, on the above subject, is deserving of more than passing attention. Probably no drug is more extensively prescribed or enthusiastically lauded in the treatment of certain heart lesions (senile weaknesses with dilatation, etc.) than this one; and yet there is a constantly increasing multitude of us who have come to believe it to be absolutely worthless if not contraindicated in these conditions. Who is right?If digitalis will do all, or even a part of what its admirers claim for it, then we nave no efficient substitute therefor, and we "need it in our business"—at least I do, for I have, and have had for many years, constantly under observation many cases in which its administration would be indicated. Can it be that our lack of faith in this drug proceeds from our having used unreliable and
Curtis WH. Digitalis and Its Standardization. JAMA. 1909;LIII(2):132. doi:10.1001/jama.1909.02550020044013
Coronavirus Resource Center
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: