论文部分内容阅读
1、本文用豚鼠法和鸽法比較了6种国产洋地黄粉、2种国产洋地黄毒甙和5种进口洋地黄毒甙的生物效价,用洋地黄粉作标准品。 2、洋地黄粉用两种方法測定的結果比較接近。洋地黄毒甙相差达一倍,鸽法的結果较高,此种較大的差异,显然是与样品和标准品在成分上的不同有关。 3、本文指出英国副藥典(1954)对洋地黃毒甙的检驗,叫种方法并列,并以洋地黄叶粉为标准品是有問題的。作者考虑到如果用一定純度的洋地黄毒甙作为生物检定的标准品时,各法可以并用,否則应按一种規定的方法进行。本室張淑坤、赵秀文、周海鈞三位同志曾参与本文一部分实驗工作。
1. The guinea pig method and the pigeon method were used to compare the biological titer of 6 kinds of domestic digitalis powder, 2 domestic digoxigenin and 5 imported digoxigenin. 2, digitalis powder using two methods to determine the results are closer. The difference in the level of digoxigenin is twice as high as that of the pigeon method. This large difference is obviously related to the difference in composition between the sample and the standard product. 3, this article pointed out that the British Pharmacopoeia (1954) test for digoxigenin, called the method of juxtaposition, and the use of digital yellow leaf as a standard product is a problem. The author takes into consideration that if certain levels of digoxigenin are used as standards for bioassays, each method can be used together, otherwise a method should be followed. The three comrades of this room, Zhang Shukun, Zhao Xiuwen, and Zhou Hailu, participated in some of the experimental work of this article.