Claims for Drugs

Claims for Drugs SIR,-You have no doubt seen a letter in the issue of Pulse of May 23 from a doctor signing himself "Jocundus." Under the heading "Conflicting Drug Evaluations," the anonymous writer complains about an alleged disagreement between Prescribers' Journal and your feature, " To-day's Drugs," over the usefulness of a proprietary drug whose name is not stated. The drug concerned seems to be the tranquillizer chlormezanone (" trancopal," Bayer Products). The important point, in my view, is that there is no real disagreement in fact between your report (April 28. p. 12101) and the report in Prescribers' Journal (February, 1962). The latter states that "the weight of evidence suggests that ' trancopal ' has no action in relieving muscle spasm in man"; whereas you confine your remarks to the opinion that " though it has received extensive clinical investigation in conditions where spasm of muscle is thought to be the cause of symptoms, the drug should be regarded is primarily a tranquillizer." It is interesting to note that Prescribers' Joturnal was also attacked in a letter in your columns of May 12 (p. 1345), and that here the drug in question, although not named, mtust be "lobak." This also contains chlormezanone and is marketed by Bayer Products. Independent drug evaluations are bound to lead, on occasion, to honest differences of opinion between them. Nevertheless Prescribers' Journal and your own feature "To-day's Drugs" are valuable, and I particularly deplore unjustified attempts to discredit them. It happens that The Medical Letter (November 24, 1961) has already expressed an opinion on trancopal (which is quoted by Prescribers' Jouirnal) in substantially the same terms as your own.-1 am, etc.,