Mr. CAMPNELL. Of course it woulil be. All action under this poragraph is court action. The Department would profer a charge of inistranding in a case which woulil go to court and be tried on its merits.

Paragraph (lv) is substantially what is in the law now. It names moro narcotic products than those given in the present art, and it also contains the following:

The Secretary is borrbox authorized by regulations prescribed after notice and hearing, to designnte iis narcotics or hypnotics within the meaning of this paragrupile such other substances ils he may find to possess narcotic or hypnotic properties.

This would permit the Secretary to include narcotics other than those name therrin, as new ones npper This is obviousíy in the interest of the consumer, and is not an imposition upon the manafacturer

Section (c) is purely what is in the act now, because nicoholic or chloroform content is required to be shown on the jubet. These products usually are present in such small quantities that they are not bit jurining.

The (TATHMAN. Does the repoul of proibition have any referenco to the use of nicohol?

Mr. CAN'HELL. No, sir.

l'amograph (el) is merely to require that directions for use be stated on drug labels. That porngraph (l), of course, should be read in connection with section 4 (a), which refers to the 1130 of strugs. It makes compulsory the rise of a lubel.

The (ITAINMAN. We will take an adjournment for one hour, to reconvenie ot 2:15.

(At 1:15 p.m. ivi uljournment was taken inntil 2:15 p.m.)


The subcommittee met at the expiration of the recess, at 2 o'clock p.m., Senator (openud presiding

Sentos ('OPELAND). The committee will come to oriler. Before asking Mr. Cumpbell to return to the stoned, there are two or three gentlemen present who must return to the East and they are proponents of the bill. Although it will be out of order a little, we will call on them now. The first one is Professor Tlenderson, of Ynio University. I'rofessor Ilenderson. STATEMENT OF PROF. YANDELL JENDERSON, PROFESSOR OF


Professor TENDENSON. Mr. Chairman, I apprecinto very highly your courtesy in allowing me to interrupt. Dr. Campeii, and, in return, I am going to try to be as brief is I possibly (and und den only with a few specific matters so as to leave time for my colleagues, Dr. Freeman and Dr. Inven Emerson, who are also to speak during this pause in Dr. Campbell's testimony.

Tlinve n railer ortensive experiener, running over many yours, in solution to certain respects of public health and the hazards to health, and even to lifo Croni substances that are not now under, but that ought to be under, the food and Drugs Act. I know of cases in



which illness, or even denth, has occurred from inndequate protection because of the inadequacy of the present law. The Food and Drug Administration has boen subject to criticism for not doing certain things that they are prevented from doing by the wenkness of the prosent law. lugree absolutely with all thint Dr. Campbell and this morning. It was entirely in accord with my experience. For this renson I have conie down here to support the strengthening and rovision of the Food and Drugs Act.

I want to dwell on just ono or two specific points. There is a now drug just now being introduced called "initrobenzol.”. I wonder that it is not on the inarket already in patent medicines. It tukex only a little to make the metabolism, thu combustion in the body, go up 10 or 15 percent or more. The man or woman that takes it. loges weight rapidly. It would be il wonderful antifut medicine. But if the patient increases the dose and takes too much, is some cortainly will, the combustion kous 11, and so extremely that the temperature rises, not only 10 to as in an ordimury fever, but go or 10°. Within 24 hours that patient has practically burned himself to death. That will happen often unless the Goverment controls the use of that drug in patent medicines.

Against such drugs the present luw does not give protection. Under the provisions of the reviser act that Dr. Canıpbell (lescribed this morning there would be protection.

The particular reasons that I have appeared at this hearing are two; first, I buvo been brought into contact with cases of injury to health, and even to life, by preparations that go into the American homes against which neither the present law nor the bill before you, flo now printed, all'ords adequute protection. This experience enables me to sco how important and how necessary is the protection that the present low does give, and how beneficial will be the increased protection that the revised law will give.

Secondly, while I am a supporter, to the Inst comma, of this bill, I have come here also to urge that its provisions should be expanded and extended sufliciently to protect the American home ngwinst household preparations that sometimes do quite as much harin as any adultorant in food preparations.

One cluss of such substances has been dealt with in a special act, the so-called “Corrosive Poisons Act”, passed 5 or 6 yours ago. Before that such substances as soda lyo and ammoniu and oxalic acid, that wonen use to clean the kitchen sink and to polish copper, were sold with no warning lubel; and it was a common accident for young children to get hold of the cun and swallow some of the contents with the result of death or lifelong injury.

This kind of accident used to happen frequently and is now provided against. But thore is another group of hazards and uccidonts against which there is as yet no protection and for which I think this revised bill should give protection.

I will touch on only two or three. One of these substances occurs in polishing powders and in the liquids used to clean fusks and spoons. Threo or four years ago there wero a nuniber of cuses of severe illness, and my personal belief is there were some deaths, from minute amounts of silver polish left on the forks and spoons.

It was very puzzling, for at first no one suspectod tho polish; overyone suspected some food, until one of tho men from the United States



Public Hoalth Service in going through the pantry of a hotel smelt the odor of bittor almond, tho odor of cyanido.' lle followed this up and found that the cases of poisoning were due to the silvor polish. It contained potassium cyanido, an excellont substance to clean silver forks and spoons but also one of the most deadly poisons.

There is nothing in the prosent Food and Drugs Act, nor in the proposed revised act, to prevent an enterprising manufacturer from putting cyanido silver polish on the market under a succession of fancy names,

Dr. Campbell spoke of berns that produced cyanide. I submit that it is not only important to avoid beans from which ono cnn got cyanide, but it is equally important that one should not get cyanido from the fork with which ono cats tho bean.

There is one other point in connection with the discussion this morning on which I would like to touch; that is the quostion of prosumption of innocence. Cortainly the inw will alwnys prostime an individual innocent until he is proved guilty. But I want to protest against assuming innoconce in a ketchup containing a poison until it is proved guilty by killing somo ono. I protest against a silver polish contnining cyanido being assumed to be innocent until it is proved that that polish has caused a donth. Cyanides should be presumod guilty oven before thoy have taken a lire,

The sainc general statement is true of nnotlier substanco, sodium fluoride, which is commonly sold to be scattered about the pantry or kitchen if there happen to be some ants in the floor or some wator bugs around thic sink. Sodium fluorido is a powerful poison. It has causou donths.

Senator Coreland. I remembersome sodium lluoride being sold as roach powder. A distinguished citizen sent out for somo hendache powder, and for somo reason thoy sent him rouch powdor and ho died. Wo found that thero wns no provision mado for labeling that packnge as poisonous or indicating how dangerous it might be. So I know of one caso where donth has occurred from the use of that substnnco.

Professor II ENDERSON. I am delighted to have my statement by the Senator. I might montion that I found sodium fluorido in my own kitchen some months ago. The control of sodium suorido insect powder to be used in the home is not covered oithor by the present law or in the proposed bill.

This is true also of floor wax containing carbon totrachlorido and related substances. Children playing on the floor havo been overcome by the fumes which are poisonous.

Against none of these and many similar honlth hnzards to tho Amorican homo does the present luw or the proposed Inw afford protection. Yot all these household properntions are bought from the same store and are delivered in the same markot basket as the food proparntions thint are covered by the present law and which will bo even better safeguarded under the proposed Inw.

I shall not take your time to discuss other examples of household health hazards. Töller for the record, a talk that I gave on the radio a short time ngo on household health hazards that deals with thioso matters. Sonator ('orelan). That will be included in the record. (This radio talki follows the diroct testimony of this witness.)


49 Professor HENDERSON. I would like also to call attention to a hearing before a conmittee of the Senate a couple of years ago on a bill to control volatile poisons. I am not going to bring up the details of that bill. I nerely want to cu!! attention to the fact that it was shown by experts and authorities like Dr. Aline llamilton, of llarvard; Dr. H. Gideon Wells, of Chicago; Dr. C.E. A Winslow'; Dr. Leach, director of the American Medical Association Chemical Laboratory; and Dr. Cary McCord, that the type of hazard to the American home I ain speaking of does exist and the home has no protection.

Senator COPELAND. Let the record show the reference to this particular document, so that it may be referred to in the future.

Professor HENDERSON. I havo here the report of the hearing before the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, United States Senato, Seventy-second Congress, first session, on 5. 3953, a bill to regulate interstate and foreign commerce in poisonous and volatile substances intended for household consumption.

I night mention that the scientific basis of that proposed law was drawn by me and it was put in shape by the legislative counsel of the Senate and was introduced by Senator Bingham. I am now only calling attention to that part of the testimony which dwells on risks to the American bone which are not now covered.

All that is necessary to bring these household preparations within the terms of the revised Food and Drugs Act is a paragraph to be inserted on page 2 between lines 17 and 18 to the effect thiut the term "household preparation" means all substances and proparations for the cleansing, polishing, preservation or improvement of the appear. ance of the hune or any of its cuipment, or the closing of its occupants, or any other use about the lone.

In addition, in line 9, on payo 3 and elsewhere, the words "househuld preparation", and then on pige 12, before the words "Sulse advertiseinent" the insertion of a section defining the misbranding of household preparations in terms almost exactly identical with those applied to foods in section 7 und to drugs in section 8.

If this addition is made, the revised act will cover practically the whole field of the protection of the American hone from drug and food preparations, cosmetics, and these household preparations that I have been speaking of; but until this is done, the protection ruloriled to the hoine will remain incompleto.

There are just one or two other points on which I would like to touch. On page 10, line 15 to 18, require that the amount of alcohol contained in any drug should be stated on the label. I did not catch the discussion of that this morning. I do not suppose that as it stands this requirement applies to beer or wines or cordials or spirits; but, in my judgment, it would be oxtremely advantageous if the roquirement of the percentage of alcohol wore extended to include all bevorages as well as all drugs. It is time that the ainerican people learned the disforence between 50-percent nicohol und 4-porcent alcohol, or 3.2 porcent, and that the effects of alcoholic beverages are determined by tho amount of alcohol and not by the color of the boverngo.

Then, finally, there is one other point that I picked up during Dr. Campbell's testimony, and that is the fact that the new bill is to include physical therapy appliances. I can speak with leartfelt barnostness on that inatter bocause I happenod a few months ago to have been appointed on the Council of Physical Therapy of the American



Medical Association, and we constantly liave referred to us all sorts of physical therapy appliances. All we can do is to approve those that are really good and then they may be advertised in tho journal of the American Medical Associntion. Those that are not useful, or those that are distinctly harmful, we can morely reject.

The Food and Drug Administration will be nhle to go much further and discredit the marketing of those thint are distinctly liarmful, and it will relieve the Council of Physical Thernpy of the American Modi. cal Association of a duty or a function which it now tries to fulfill. We do tho best we can, but we are certain that the Food and Drug Administration can do it much bettor.

To sum up, my experience with thoso matters that are not covered by the present law, but that should be covered by the rovised law, shows how immensely important and how necossary protection is in those matters that are covered, and how inuch needed in those that are not covered. On these grounds I strongly support and urge the passago and approval of the revised Act, and the additional fextures. that I have here discusacd.



BY DR. YANDELL HENDERSON I ain going to talk over with you some of the dangers that we are all exposed to nowadays. We all realize the hazards to life and health that the automobile has introduced, for many people are killed even in trying to cross the street. But the dangers that we are going to consider now are not so well known. They are quite largely hazards to henlth and dangers to life that occur in our homes.

Nearly all these dangers have developed rather recently. They are nearly all due to advances in science. You know that the advances in mcdical science havo greatly decreased the deaths and illnces from infectious diseases. The applica. tions of inedical science have inade lise much healthier and the average life much longer. A generation ngo diserace like typboid fever and chiphtheria caused a heavy death rat while now in a town or city with a good health department a year inay go by with frw or jo deaths from these disenses. To a large extent this advance has been inde by the health departinents of our cities, our States, and the National Government. It is the fashion junt now to critirize the Government for conting so much and for requiring higli taxes to support it. But the truth is that the service that the National, State, and local governments render un simply in protecting our bealth is worth every cent we ever pay in taxes. It would be a dinnster, if the effort to decrease the openACH of our various govorninents resulted in crippling the public health ecsvicce.

We know that the police protect our property and our lives from criminale; that the fire departments protect our humes froin fire; and that the United Statos Army and Navy protect 118 from foreign enemics. But we ackum think of the protection that thic Governinent gives 118 in regard to the food that we cat and that it should give us in regard to certain hinzarris to which our hoich are now exponed. The most important protection of this sort in that afforded by the Federal pure food law, nuri similar inw's in the Sintes together with the arrangeinents that The Government maintains to see that the pure food Inwe are Olcyod. The agricultural experiment stations in many States are every day analyzing samples of foods that are being sold on the open market anal these results are published in the reports of these wtntions. Impure foods are confisented and destroyed. You can get one of these reports by writing to your state government.

Before the pure food law was passed any food producer could soll nearly any. thing that he could persuade the public to buy, no matter how nich his product was misrepresented. I remember some strawberry jam that was highly Adver. tied as a superior product, but it was found to consist of apple buttersweetened with corn syrup, llavored with a synthetic chemical Invoring, colored with a coal-tar dye, with artificial wooden secus scattered through the jar. The one

« ForrigeFortsett »