This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on ISI (1)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in JAMA

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: Popular and medical literature, such as the article by Dr. Eisenberg and colleagues,¹ on use of alternative medicine and herbal remedies triggered memories of our student days in 1942-1945 when we were assailed by extensive discussions of the merits of various digitalis preparations. Methods of standardization were most important when evaluating which preparation to prescribe. Especially treacherous were the preparations labeled "Digitalis USP XI," which were about twice as potent as those labeled "Digitalis USP X."²

One of us (E.L.D.) who is an avid collector of old books recalled a relevant chapter in an old edition of The Dispensatory of the United States of America.³ It was enlightening to read the detailed description of the unique difficulties in elucidating the various properties of the wide variety of active compounds in the digitalis leaf. Cats, pigeons, frogs, and people were test subjects. There were descriptions of at least . . . [Full Text of this Article]

RELATED ARTICLE

Trends in Alternative Medicine Use in the United States, 1990-1997: Results of a Follow-up National Survey
David M. Eisenberg, Roger B. Davis, Susan L. Ettner, Scott Appel, Sonja Wilkey, Maria Van Rompay, and Ronald C. Kessler
JAMA. 1998;280(18):1569-1575.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Mobility Limitations and Complementary and Alternative Medicine: Are People with Disabilities More Likely to Pray?
Hendershot
Am. J. Public Health 2003;93:1079-1080.
FULL TEXT