This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.
Buffalo, N. Y., Feb. 17, 1902.
To the Editor:
—The method of quantitating sugar in urine, reported by Dr. Wm. H. German, and credited to Mr. Carl Irenaeus in The Journal of February 1, apparently does not differ in principle from that of Dr. Purdy, yet the table does not seem to correspond proportionately to that published in Dr. Purdy's book. Is the "Purdy's solution" of different strength or what is the explanation? A. L. Benedict, M.D.The above was submitted to Dr. German, who answered as follows: "The proportion of urine required in this test is larger than in the Purdy test, though the same copper solution is used. This is due to the smaller bulk of the test, a slight excess of urine being required to give a perfect end-reaction."
Sugar Testing with Haines' and Purdy's Solutions.. JAMA. 1902;XXXVIII(9):598. doi:10.1001/jama.1902.02480090050018
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: