INDUSTRIAL
-dENGINEERING Published by the AmEriaan Chemiod 80cIetY
HARRISON
EDITORIALS
E. HOWE, Editor
I
~
Our Food and Drugs
any function of the body of man or other animals, and the Department of Agriculture through its Food and Drug Administration is empowered to set up definitions and standards for foods which will have the force of law. One of the important sections which becomes effective immediately is that dealing with new drugs. The traffic in food injurious to health is prohibited, whereas heretofore the law has applied only where injurious components had been added. Provision is made for establishing tolerances for unavoidable poisons, such as spray residues. Drugs or devices dangerous under the conditions prescribed on the label are prohibited, and if any drug which is not standard differs from the standard it professes to meet, this must be stated on the label. Likewise, drugs departing from standards as set up in the United States Pharmacopoeia or National Formulary must state in what way they differ from such standards and even the details of packaging set up in the United States Pharmacopoeia and National Formulary must be met. Labels must carry a warning against habitforming drugs and details both as to use and misuse. Nonofficial drugs and remedies must have the names of active ingredients on the labels and there is provision against the use of containers that might be injurious to the contents, against slack filling, and packages of deceptive shape. Antiseptics must have germicidal value. Special dietary foods must carry on their labels information for the customer regarding their properties and the content of important ingredients, such as vitamins, minerals, and the like. The labels on foods which have no standard must disclose the ingredients by name. The certification of coal-tar colors is recognized in the law. A special advantage is the elimination of the necessity, as in the old law, of proving fraud in case of misbranding medicines. This will be a great help in proper and reasonable enforcement. Increased penalties have been provided, as well as an injunction procedure. As indicated above, the section relative to new drugs is effective at once, as is the prohibition of drugs dangerous in the doses prescribed on the labels and certain other features. The major portion of the law becomes
FTER years of effort, uncounted conferences, conA versations, and hearings, and notwitzstanding block effort to the last minute, we a t last have a new law to strengthen the hands of those who would protect the consumer in matters pertaining to food, drugs, cosmetics, and therapeutic devices. The result is a compromise. From some points of view it is defective, but when the accounts are balanced there is a considerable improvement over existing legislation, and for that we should be grateful. While obviously the result of the work of many, the major credit in the Senate must go to the late Senator Copeland and in the House to Congressmen Chapman of Kentucky and Mapes of Michigan. It was the Senator who bore the heaviest burden and, after the objectionable appeal provisions had been added to S. 5 in the House, he was prepared to do what he could to defeat the measure he had fathered unIess these could be eliminated. In a real sense, the law may be regarded as a monument to Senator Copeland. Something may be said in criticism. It is thoughtprovoking to know that, in the last stages, apple growers would cheerfully have sacrificed the entire bill rather than to submit to any control of spray residue. We have been accustomed to think of the vendors of patented medicines as assuming the role of Mephistopheles rather than any group within the food-producing industry. Then, thanks to the power of the chairman of the House Committee, we find exempted from the necessity of meeting reasonable definitions, standards of quality and identity, fresh or dried fruits and fresh or dried vegetables, thereby placing beyond control the amount of moisture which the consumer is required to purchase in his dried fruits or vegetables, this being of special interest to one state. A more complete discussion of the law will appear later in our NEWSEDITION.It will suffice here to point out that the new law contains the conventional provisions for control of toleration of imported and interstate food and drugs, as in the existing law passed in 1906. I n addition, there are cosmetics, therapeutic devices, and those which affect the structure or 723
724
INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
effective twelve months from the date of its enactment, but the Department of Agriculture is empowered to begin at once the formulation of standards, preparation of regulations, and the holding of such hearings as may be necessary in paving the way to enforce actively the several provisions. It is not unlikely that the courts will have to take their turn with some of the new features before everything is sufficiently nailed down and is proceeding smoothly. We must expect some further legislation in an effort more nearly to attain perfection. For what we have, however, we should be grateful. It will be remembered that much of the discussion pertaining to what has been so long known as S. 5 revolved around the question of advertising. The Congress saw fit to divorce this from the food and drug bill, and the Wheeler-Lea bill, now a law, places this responsibility with the Federal Trade Commission. As usual, a half loaf is better than none, but in many quarters there is little enthusiasm as to how effective this law can be in really protecting the public. The subject matter of advertising, particularly where pharmaceuticals, medicinals, and cosmetics are concerned, involves a degree of scientific background and information which thus far the Federal Trade Commission itself does not possess. It draws upon expert personnel in other departments, but there is nothing quite like having a specialist of your own, who knows the problem and your point of view, accompany you to a hearing where the other side of the question is to be argued by those well supported with just such expert advisers. It is to be expected that the Federal Trade Commission will exercise the greatest care in this department of its work. The time has long since passed when the public should have insisted upon and received the truth in advertising, even though the products fall short of the wonderful attributes assigned to them by those specialists in superlatives known as advertising men. In all of this our profession will see a new opportunity for service, an additional obligation to the public, and the requirement that, based on knowledge and carefully considered conclusions, the scientist must at all times report the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Ref res h ment
THESE
are the days of announcements of summer courses, many of them designed especially for the men in plants who find it advantageous to combine vacation with just enough study to pass the time pleasantly and keep interested. A well-conducted course also quickly brings them abreast of the times in their specialty so that they renew their youth physically and mentally simultaneously. A summer course under an
VOL. 30. NO. 7
inspiring leader and in a congenial environment can be made a refreshing experience and one we can recommend to those who are aware of the keen competition as well as the rapid progress in our science.
Rockefeller Foundation Report HIS report presents a review of the activities of T t he foundation for 1937 under twenty-two principal sections, and of the matters discussed two in particular have attracted our attention. The fist of these deals with the restrictions which have hampered the search for truth conducted by the foundation. Disinterested research cannot survive in an atmosphere of compulsion and repression. It withers under the efforts of governments to impose uniform ideologies and to circumscribe in the interests of a dominant regime the area of intellectual liberty. Particularly in the broad ranee of subjects covered by the social sciences, and in the humanities as well, the world has recently witnessed in several countries the progressive disintegration of creative scholarship.
The other concerns chemistry and medicine. In this section the report reminds us of the world's debt of gratitude to the contributions of certain great Germans-von Liebig, Wijhler, Buchner, Fischer, and Erhlich-to the progress of organic chemistry and indicates the effect of this work upon agriculture, industry, and biology. The discussion then goes on to charge that, in the United States, the development in the field of organic chemistry has been disappointingly slow and says that in very few of the places where good work is being done is there evidence of that coijperative effort in the fields of organic chemistry, the biological sciences, and medicine which distinguished the German effort at the time of its maximum development. Furthermore, the report states that here industry does its own research and the academic research worker has not in general received its support and contrasts this with the European method. This leads up to the declaration of the foundation that, because of the essential contributions of organic chemistry to the progress of modern medicine and biology, trustees of the foundation have made appropriations ostensibly to create centers in which organic chemistry may be suitably developed. Our readers can judge for themselves the extent to which what is cited in the report is erroneous. From time to time we have published long lists of scholarships and fellowships, including those for postdoctorates, supported by industry and with a ,substantial proportion available for work in the field of organic chemistry. We can recall no single instance of an outstanding professor of organic chemistry who, in addition to the support for his work at his academic institution, is without his direct contacts as a consultant with some phase of the organic chemical industry. If progress in the application of organic chemistry to biology has been slow, may it not be due to the appreciation which the
JULY. 1938
INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
industries have shown for the outstanding organic chemist by taking him into their own organizations, thereby weakening the pure research and academic side? It may also be said that the universities and even the foundations have been extraordinarily slow in recognizing the value of the organic chemist, and for over two decades the man who has received the encouragement has been the mathematical variety of physical chemist, rather than he who would enter organic research as a career. Indeed, the stimulation of physical chemistry of this type, especially by the National Research Council Fellowships, has been so successful that today there is a special committee of the council, the purpose of which is to encourage American universities to absorb some of the able young mathematical physical chemists who are either without posts or not suitably employed, Recently organized laboratories in need of biochemists have found great difkulty in locating men trained in the subject from the standpoint of chemistry as applied to biology, the majority having received just the opposite emphasis. The number of outstanding centers for organic research are indeed few in the United States. m e t h e r the greatest progress will be made by granting funds to institutions heretofore better known for progress in other fields of chemistry than organic remains to be seen. It is interesting that two laboratories overseas were given substantial grants at, the same time two institutions received help here, even though the lack, according to the report, is solely in the United States. It is perhaps unbecoming to suggest how anyone should spend his money, but now that a great philanthropic agency primarily interested in science has recognized what many have been urging for at least ten years, it is encouraging to note in the report that “the trustees of the foundation have felt it important that some strategic assistance should be given to organic chemistry in the United States.” If they will but persist in this policy, it may safely be predicted that within less than twenty years organic chemistry in America will experience acceleration as significant as that which has come to physical chemistry during the past two decades with the help and encouragement of the foundation. We may even look upon this report, not as an improper criticism of the American organic chemists, but rather as assistance in a situation where certainly the most can be made of all the help which so great an organization can bring.
Ideal Research Men GUNN, technical adviser to the U. S. Naval Research Laboratory, recently catalogued the specifications of the ideal research man. He was speaking of the research physicist, who, he said, should be firmly grounded in the fundamentals of physics, chemistry, mathematics, and engineering, but he added the
ROSS
725
following which applies with equal force to those choosing research in other fields: He should be especially keen in estimating situations and reaching sound decision. His judgment and perspective should be such that he can give his talents systematic direction. He should be an original thinker and have original ideas. He should be exceptional in his ability to plan, think, and do things without being told. He should have the courage of his convictions, yet must not be blinded by them. He should constantly seek the truth. He should be especially successful in working harmoniously with others toward a common end.
Consumers’ Protection
N OT
long ago representatives of ten national organizations met to take the first steps toward setting up standard methods and procedures for the guidance of testing laboratories and other public endorsement agencies under the auspices of the American Standards Association. It is apparent how loosely such significant words as “approved,” “certified,” and “guaranteed” have been used in descriptive literature, on tickets or labels, and even as a trade designation. It was to be expected, therefore, that leading consultants, testing engineers, and others who seriously undertake work of this type should realize the necessity of taking steps which would suppress and in time eliminate the irresponsible, insignificant, and worthless certification and listing of products offered to the consumer. Surely the growth of pseudo-scientific statements must be definitely checked; otherwise all reports and statements based upon honest and painstaking work will be brought into disrepute. The plan which is just getting under way contemplates setting up standard practices covering fundamentals which should underlie all approval procedures, such standards to be developed in coijperation by consumers, producers, distributors, and advertisers. Already there seems to be agreement that recommended standards should include a clear statement of the auspices under which any plan of approval is operated, adequate independent sampling and testing of the product to determine its conformity with the definite published standards, systematic reexamination to ensure continuing conformity, records of tests to be publicly available, and compliance with these principles to be indicated on labels and tags. The effort should have the support of all who are concerned with a proper and controlled application of science in supplying to the consumer information which he can understand and which will protect him in his purchases. That is the ultimate aim of the groups which have undertaken the project here discussed. None of us should countenance inaccurate or unworthy endorsements or certifications. It will be a factor in improving the professional status of the chemist, chemical engineer, and others who may perform such tests if the committee on valid certification is successful.
