When foods become remedies in ancient Greece: The curious case of garlic and other substances

ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE

The debate on the food-drug continuum could benefit from a historical dimension. This study aims at showing this through one case: the food-drug continuum in Greece in the fifth- and fourth-century BCE. I suggest that at the time the boundary between food and drug - and that between dietetics and pharmacology - was rather blurred.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

I study definitions of 'food' and 'medicine' in texts from the fifth- and fourth-century BCE: the Hippocratic texts, the botanical treatises of Theophrastus and the pseudo-Aristotelian Problems. To illustrate these abstract definitions, I focus on two substances: garlic and silphium.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The Hippocratics were writing in a context of increased professionalization and masculinization of medicine, a context in which dietetics became the most prestigious branch of medicine, praised above pharmacology and surgery. While medicine was becoming more specialised, professionalised and masculine, it avoided becoming too conspicuously so. The Hippocratic authors sometimes noted that medical discoveries are serendipitous and can be made by anyone, whether medically trained or not. By doing so, they allowed themselves to integrate common knowledge and practice into their writings.

CONCLUSION

In the context of the professionalization of ancient medicine, the Hippocratic authors started to address the difference between food and medicine. They saw, however, some advantage in acknowledging the continuum between food and medicine. Scholars should avoid drawing too strict a boundary between ancient dietetics and pharmacology and should instead adopt a multi-disciplinary approach to the therapeutics of the Hippocratic texts.

Good food and bad: Nutritional and pleasurable eating in ancient Greece

ETHNOPHARMACOLOGICAL RELEVANCE

This paper speaks to the theme of the boundaries of food and medicine as constructed in the Greek and Roman worlds. It examines how physicians developed innovative ways of thinking about the body that did not attribute health and sickness to the intervention of gods. Ancient physicians and natural historians conceived of new potencies for substances and described their impact on the body׳s physiology between the late fifth century BC and the early third century AD. The legacy of these ideas and practices had great traction in the Mediterranean world and survived into Early Modern Times, and until the rise of new forms of science.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This article analyses texts transmitted from the ancient world and considers how substances were attributed nutritional and medical potency. The texts relevant to this analysis include medical and philosophical treatises as well as cookery books. The article highlights discussions about the nature of food and drugs and the herbs thought to cross the boundaries between them. It interrogates different contexts within which foods were thought good or bad for the body, and the social and moral connotations attached to those perceptions.

CONCLUSION

Much of the analysis is devoted to understanding the flavours that were a key marker in the nutritional potencies attributed to foodstuffs. However there are clear and influential moral boundaries set by Plato in the discourse around food and pleasure. While every physician should be a chef, and many wrote cookery books that have been lost, a chef׳s talent was located in increasing pleasure, and therefore a less valuable skill. However the different literary genres show overlapping terminology and concerns, particularly with the quality of ingredients. Poor taste was not only a culinary concern. With regard to the setting of boundaries between foods and medicines, the transition between one category and another is frequently determined by the preparation and strengthening of a food׳s potency.

[History of oyster as drug from the origin to the 21st century]

Since Antiquity, oyster is a subject of interest and medical use, as indicated by Oribiase and Galien. From the 17th century, this unique drug was proposed by physicians for various diseases, and more often for (la rage). One could think that that drug disappeared at the 20th and 21st centuries. But we can observe that it was still recommended by several authors as drug. Still today, companies offer oyster under various forms for allopathic and homeopathic treatments, as well as for food supplement. Research are ongoing to discover active substances within oyster and their potential medical interests.

[Who coined the French word "coricide"?]

In this article, the author examines the claims of the pharmacist Adolphe René Le Brun, assignee of the trademark "Coricide russe". Litigation and trials are reported. Some hypotheses are studied. But for now, no final award is considered.

Transdermal patches: history, development and pharmacology

Transdermal patches are now widely used as cosmetic, topical and transdermal delivery systems. These patches represent a key outcome from the growth in skin science, technology and expertise developed through trial and error, clinical observation and evidence-based studies that date back to the first existing human records. This review begins with the earliest topical therapies and traces topical delivery to the present-day transdermal patches, describing along the way the initial trials, devices and drug delivery systems that underpin current transdermal patches and their actives. This is followed by consideration of the evolution in the various patch designs and their limitations as well as requirements for actives to be used for transdermal delivery. The properties of and issues associated with the use of currently marketed products, such as variability, safety and regulatory aspects, are then described. The review concludes by examining future prospects for transdermal patches and drug delivery systems, such as the combination of active delivery systems with patches, minimally invasive microneedle patches and cutaneous solutions, including metered-dose systems.

[The Formulaires of Magendie (1821-1840) of the chemical pharmacy to pharmacology]

With nine consecutive issues published from 1821 to 1836, the Formulaire concepted by Magendie as a usual tool for the medical precriptions, was first dedicated to the new chemical pharmaceuticals, mainly the pure alcaloids, strychnine, quinine and morphine, extracted from raw products. As well he included mineral chemicals, hydrocyanates, iodine and bromide, all supported by newly achieved works, from Pelletier, Caventou and others. Magendie perfectly skilled in animal experimentation, developped and standardized the as far as to evaluate the activity and safety degrees of these new components. It clearly anticipated the evaluation plan determined by the law for the registration of the new drugs in the twentieth century.

Samuel Holden Parsons Lee (1772-1863): American physician, entrepreneur and selfless fighter of the 1798 Yellow Fever epidemic of New London, Connecticut

Samuel Holden Parsons Lee practised medicine at a time when the germ theory of disease had not yet been proposed and antibiotics remained undiscovered. In 1798 he served selflessly as the only physician in town who was willing to battle the Yellow Fever outbreak of New London, Connecticut. Because he practised at the dawn of the age of patent medicine, unfortunately his name also came to be associated with medical quackery. We argue that his contributions have been grossly underestimated. He compounded and vended medications - including bilious pills and bitters - that were gold standards of the day. Moreover, one preparation for treatment of kidney stones led to his sub-specialization in this field and was met with such success that its sale continued for nearly 100 years after his death. While a talented medical man, Lee also had a knack for business, finding success in trading, whaling and real estate.

The evil of the unknown--risk-benefit evaluation of new synthetic drugs in the 19th century

In the 19th century, synthetic chemistry discovered completely new chemical entities for medicinal use, which dramatically enriched the therapeutic armamentarium. However, no information was available regarding the safety of these new drugs, which were unrelated to most of the medicinal agents formerly known. Therefore, the question arises, if and how far, considerations regarding the relationship between benefit and risks were made. In this study, chloroform, phenazone (antipyrine) and sulfonal, were investigated as examples for drugs newly introduced in the 19th century. The results revealed that these drugs were provided by the manufacturer, tested by the physicians in a multicentre pattern and side effects were published in the medical literature soon after. Within a few years, several hundred cases were reported but the data were rarely summarized statistically. Therefore, physicians needed to stay updated with the medical literature because neither systematic industrial research nor regulatory authorities existed. The number of case reports within the first years were sufficient to detect common (> 1/100 to < 1/10) side effects but rare events were also reported. An extraordinary example is the drug-induced toxic epidermal necrolysis, which is commonly known as the Lyell syndrome or its less severe form, the Stevens-Johnson syndrome. This reaction has been clearly described by Baruch Spitz (1854-1932) as a side effect of antipyrine in 1887, several decades before Stevens, Johnson and particularly Lyell.

World trade in medicinal plants from Spanish America, 1717-1815

This article outlines the history of the commerce in medicinal plants and plant-based remedies from the Spanish American territories in the eighteenth century. It maps the routes used to transport the plants from Spanish America to Europe and, along the arteries of European commerce, colonialism and proselytism, into societies across the Americas, Asia and Africa. Inquiring into the causes of the global 'spread' of American remedies, it argues that medicinal plants like ipecacuanha, guaiacum, sarsaparilla, jalap root and cinchona moved with relative ease into Parisian medicine chests, Moroccan court pharmacies and Manila dispensaries alike, because of their 'exotic' charisma, the force of centuries-old medical habits, and the increasingly measurable effectiveness of many of these plants by the late eighteenth century. Ultimately and primarily, however, it was because the disease environments of these widely separated places, their medical systems and materia medica had long become entangled by the eighteenth century.

[Supplemental information on Dr. Alexandre Choffé and his Vin Désiles]

About ten years ago, we reveal the identity of the creator of "Vin Désiles": Dr. Alexander Choffe. During this decade, we have updated new biographical informations on this character and we present them in the first part of this article. The second part is devoted to the history of the sale of "Vin Désiles" in Molière's native house at the Universal Exposition which took olace in Paris in 1900.

The testing of Sanocrysin: science, profit, and innovation in clinical trial design, 1926-31

This article provides a detailed analysis of the origins and significance of the 1926 clinical trial of Sanocrysin, a gold compound thought at the time to be useful in the treatment of tuberculosis. This experiment is generally considered to be the first clinical trial in the United States that used a formal system of randomization to divide research subjects into treatment and nontreatment groups; it was probably also the first clinical trial in the United States to use placebo shams in a nontreatment control group to overcome the problem of what researchers at the time called "psychic influence." As such, it was an extremely important moment in the history of clinical trial design. Yet, as I argue, the Sanocrysin experiment also needs to be understood in terms of both the regulatory environment at the time and the commercial interests of Parke, Davis & Company, the pharmaceutical manufacturer that was intent on introducing the drug. Although some historians argue that therapeutic reformers in the twentieth century used experimental science to rein in the commercial forces of the market, this article suggests that, at least in this case, the promotion of rigorous clinical science and the pursuit of corporate profit were deeply intertwined.

[Drugs and pharmacists for the army, 1800-1815]

SUMMARY During this period, the authority was exerted by Parmentier, as the head and chief pharmacist for the French armies. For the military hospitals scattered all over Europe, he organised the pharmacies services rules, with technical and financial concerns. The first aid devices on the battlefield included a special box for pharmacy containing ressucitation and siccative items for the wounds, and immediately available for the surgeon's use. The qualified pharmacy staff exhibited large variations, from 200 to 1.100 people in 1812.

[Early achievements of the Danish pharmaceutical industry-7]

A/S GEA Farmaceutisk Fabrik was established as a family business in 1927 by the pharmacist Knud L. Gad Andresen who until then had been employed in the pharmaceutical industry. Gad Andresen wanted to run a company focusing on the development of generics, and he wanted this development to take place in a close cooperation with Danish physicians. This has indeed been achieved with success. In 1995 GEA was purchase'd by the American pharmaceutical company Bristol-Myers Squibb who in a press release characterized GEA as Denmark's second largest manufacturer of generics. Immediately after this takeover GEA's R&D department ceased the research in innovative products and from now on exclusively focused on the development of generics. Three years later GEA was sold to the German generic company Hexal who later on resold GEA to the Swiss generic company Sandoz. GEA changed ownership another couple of times until the last owner went bankrupt in 2011. GEA is yet again a model example of an early Danish pharmaceutical company which was established as an individual company, and which had a long commercial success with the production and marketing of generics. GEA's earliest products, the organotherapeutics, were not innovations. The innovative products were developed already in the 1890s in Denmark by Alfred Benzon, and later on copies followed a.o. from Medicinalco and from foreign companies before GEA marketed their generics. Therefore GEA had to promote their preparations as especially qualified medicinal products and to intimate that the products of the competitors were less "active'". At the end of the 1920s the Ministry of Health became aware of the fact that there might be health problems related to the none-existing control of both the or- ganotherapeutic preparations and actually also the other medicinal products of the pharmaceutical industry. Therefore the Ministry had requested the National Board of Health for a statement regarding this problem. The National Board of Health was, however, at that time of the opinion that there were no serious problems with organotherapeutics from those companies marketing such products. It requires studies in the unprinted journals of the Ministry of Health and the National Board of Health to find the background for and the causes of the request from the Ministry at this point concerning the control of the organotherapeutic products of the pharmaceutical industry. Neither were GEA's barbiturates innovative products. The "Gad Andresen Case" is interesting for two reasons. Firstly, it illustrates that the development of generics at this stage could not always take place exclusively in a pharmaceutical-chemical laboratory, but also required a certain minimum of clinical trials including human beings. Secondly, it shows that the industrial products had now slowly, but surely gained market shares and displaced the pharmacy-produced medicinal products to such an extent that it did not only worry the pharmacy owners and their trade orga- nization. Now this concern had also resulted in a counteract so that the pharmacies in the manufacture of their products had to copy the industrial products, however, in certain cases with a dubious result. Gealgica tablets and especially their content of fenacetine is not only a model example of how the opinion of the positive and negative properties of a medicinal product changes over time. It also shows how long time could pass before the health authorities took measures against a substance with problematic side effects in spite of the fact that less damaging substances had been available for a long time, in this case paracetamol. Medicinal products containing fenacetine were on the market for almost 100 years. On the contrary meprobamat is a model example of a drug substance where the opinion of its positive and negative properties changed essentially over a relatively short period. In spite of this it remained on the market for a little less than 40 years. Restenil and Trihistan are mentioned on Knud & Dagny Gad Andresen's homepage (in 2014) as new medicinal products developed by GEA. This is not quite correct. Both drug substances in these preparations had been developed in the USA. In Denmark GEA had the possibility to market these substances under GEA's own brand names along with corresponding foreign brand names. It can be concluded that GEA's own research on the whole was confined to the development of own patentable syntheses of already known drug substances. During the later marketing of generics GEA appealed to the national feeling of the Danish population in the same way as a.o. Pharmacia did in the 1920s. From the very start GEA specialized in the manufacture of generics, and GEA was able to follow this way with commercial success--as a Danish alternative--for almost 90 years.

[Early achievements of the Danish pharmaceutical industry-6 Pharmacia]

The article series provides a written and pictorial account of the Danish pharmaceutical industry's products from their introduction until about 1950. Part 6 deals with products from A/S Pharmacia. A/S Pharmacia was established in Copenhagen in 1922 as a Danish limited company by the enterprising pharmacist Edward Jacobsen. Pharmacia was not Jacobsen's first pharmaceutical company as previously he had established a pharmaceutical agency already in 1913 which in 1919 was reorganized to a limited company by the name of A/S Edward Jacobsen. This agency was later extended to include a production of generics. Jacobsen remained the co-owner and manager of Pharmacia until 1934 where he resigned and established another company, A/S Ejco, for the manufacture of generics. It is worth mentioning that already in 1911 a Swedish pharmaceutical company was established named AB Pharmacia. Today we do not know whether Edward Jacobsen knew about this Swedish company. Later on in 1936 AB Pharmacia and A/S Pharmacia made a contract concerning mutual market sharing, and a research cooperation was brought about between the two companies which resulted in an increase of turnover for A/S Pharmacia. In 1955 the cooperation between the two companies was increased as the Swedish company joined as principal shareholder with the purpose of continuing and developing the Danish company as an independent pharmaceutical company with its own research and development as well as manufacture, control and marketing. Therefore Pharmacia in Denmark was able to establish a synthesis factory in Koge and move the domicile to new premises in Hillered. In 1993 Pharmacia was presented in a printed matter as "The largest Nordic pharmaceutical company" as a result of the merger between the Swedish Kabi Pharmacia, formerly established by a merger between Kabi Vitrum and AB Pharmacia, and the Italian Farmitalia Carlo Erba. Only two years later in 1995 Pharmacia merged with the American pharmaceutical company The Upjohn Company under the name of Pharmacia & Upjohn. In 2000 this company was merged with the chemical group Monsanto under a new name, Pharmacia Corporation. Pharmacia Corporation was taken over by Pfizer in 2003. The early activities of A/S Pharmacia included not only the import of raw materials and ready-made articles, such as medicinal products, but also the manufacture of own medicinal products. This is not surprising considering the founder Edward Jacobsen's pharmaceutical career. Pharmacia's early manufacture of own medicinal products consisted mainly of generics, however, not only the expensive foreign medicinal products, but also any available Danish generics such as easily manufactured pharmacopeia products. It is thus worth mentioning that Pharmacia's own technological production capacity at that time was limited and required a cooperation with other (Danish) pharmaceutical companies. Pharmacia was able to produce tablet cores, but the sugarcoating had to be made by external business partners. Pharmacia was able to produce digitalis preparations, but the standardization of these had to be effected elsewhere. The total production of one of Pharmacia's products took place at an external business partner. Pharmacia was established at a time where the increasing use of industrially manufactured medicinal products, both Danish and foreign ones, had resulted in a considerable decrease in sales of pharmacy produced medicinal products. This had for a long time worried The Danish Association of Pharmacies, and this resulted in a reaction from the association, namely the DAK-products which by nature were produced in Denmark and thus became the most essential element in the fight against the industrially manufactured products--a fight which according to the association had to be fought with all legal means. Therefore The Danish Association of Pharmacies obviously reacted precipitated when in 1926 the association in writing stated that Pharmacia's products were not manufactured in Denmark in spite of the fact that they were labelled as such according to agreement with Landsforeningen Dansk Arbejde, i.e., The National Association Danish Work, which in 1925 allowed Pharmacia to use the labels of the association. The unemployment was high in the 1920'ies and increasing so when Pharmacia subsequently took legal action against the Association of Pharmacies and claimed that the statement was unjustified and might harm Pharmacia, it may indicate that the public of that time looked positively upon the manufacture and the use of Danish manufactured products. The Danish Association of Pharmacies lost the case as the claim according to the court was unjustified and thus unlawful. The suspicions of the association were not supported by facts, however, they were not either completely groundless. Following this The National Association Danish Work gave notice to terminate the contract with Pharmacia concerning the right to use the labels of the association. By expanding the cooperation and later on by merging with the Swedish Pharmacia AB the Danish A/S Pharmacia succeeded in continuing and developing a company where research, development and production of innovative medicinal products as well as of generics could take place in Denmark.

[WHY LEK AND LEKARSTWO--SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES OF THE MEANING IN THE POLISH LANGUAGE]

Language, as a system of communication, usually does not tolerate two different words that would have exactly the same meaning. The reason why modern Polish words lek and lekarstwo, both meaning medicine, are still used, even though they mean exactly the same thing, is that originally they meant something else, and the process of approximation of their meanings was long and complicated enough for the language not to be able to eliminate the unnecessary one.

Controlling the production and distribution of drugs in communist Poland

Between 1944 and 1989--the period of communist power in Poland--the national pharmaceutical market experienced several dramatic changes. The country was a prodigious importer of drugs following the Second World War, with a large portion of the medicine received being donated by various aid organisations. In the 1960s, Poland became a significant exporter of drugs to the Eastern Bloc countries, but dropped down the list of meaningful producers again after the post-1989 transformation. For four and a half decades the pharmaceutical market in Poland had been a scene of political and ideological struggle. The companies, owned and controlled by the state, were poorly managed, being neither innovative nor competitive. This fact, along with the state's irrational and inconsequent drug policy, caused an almost permanent shortage in drug supplies for patients: ironic for a socialist system in which universal and free health care was a basic principle.