Santonin - Historical Pharmacological Use

Historical Pharmacological Use

As noted above, santonin was formerly used as an anthelminthic, typically administered with a purgative. Santonin was used in treatment of infestation by the roundworm Ascaris lumbricoides and in ascarid parasitoses in general (including threadworm parasitosis). It is ineffective in treatment of tapeworm infestation.

The Encyclopædia Britannica (1911) notes that the typical dose was 2 to 5 grams. (It should be noted this was a total dose; many regimens called for 3 doses daily over 3 days, and the "3 teaspoons 3 times a day for 3 days" regimen was typical around the '50s when use of santonin was starting to wane; actual doses per dose were closer to 20-30 milligrams per adult dose in a typical "'50s regimen", but "one-shot" doses of santonin (especially via suppository) were common in the late 19th century-early 20th century.) The only formerly registered British preparation (as of 1911) was the "trochiscus santonini" (santonin lozenge), but the preparation "sodii santoninas" (soda of santonin) was also formerly listed as an official preparation in the U.S. Pharmacopoeia. Commercial preparations containing santonin (usually containing a purgative laxative as well) also appeared in US drug formularies as late as the '50s; the Modern Drug Encyclopedia and Therapeutic Index of 1955 listed Lumbricide (produced by Massengill) and a generic santonin preparation made by Winthrop-Stearns (now Winthrop-Sanofi).

Santonin also was used in a lesser extent in treatment of atony of the bladder. This usage largely dropped off after the early 20th century.

Dosage forms varied for santonin; in the 19th-20th centuries, santonin lozenges or suppositories designed for single-dosage treatment of ascarid infestation were the typical form of treatment, whilst in the 50's the two remaining santonin preparations on the market in the United States were liquid medications.

Read more about this topic:  Santonin

Famous quotes containing the word historical:

    After so many historical illustrations of the evil effects of abandoning the policy of protection for that of a revenue tariff, we are again confronted by the suggestion that the principle of protection shall be eliminated from our tariff legislation. Have we not had enough of such experiments?
    Benjamin Harrison (1833–1901)