This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on Web of Science (6)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

E. Charles Kunkle, M.D.

Arch Neurol. 1960;3(5):481-483.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

An accurate evaluation of antiepileptic medication is never easy. Gowers was fully aware of this in 1881: "There is no point in therapeutics... more open to fallacy, or on which more generalizations have been published which subsequent observation has proved to be inaccurate" (in proof of which was his own half-hearted endorsement of anticonvulsant properties in digitalis and zinc).¹ In the continuing search for better drugs for seizures the troublesome question can still be raised: Has any satisfactory system for drug appraisal yet been devised?

Preliminary information regarding anticonvulsant activity of a new compound is obtained at first hand from laboratory experiments. These can show that the drug is not obviously damaging to vital organs and functions of the test animal and that it has a sufficiently prolonged period of action. A rough assessment is made by observing its effects upon the threshold or intensity of seizures induced . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Footnotes
Received for publication July 19, 1960.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?