To: axial who wrote (9034 ) 3/16/2002 6:24:32 PM From: Joe Krupa Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 14101 Jim, in reference to DMSO, you stated "I think it is very likely that DMX has overcome that bias. " I'd say that is very likely, considering the evidence you've already listed. The following posted by JimmyD21 on SH, also tells me that this is the case: fda.gov Notice from this document that DMSO is listed as a Class 3 drug by the FDA. A Class 3 drug is described as follows:"Solvents in Class 3 (Table 3) may be regarded as less toxic and of lower risk to human health. Class 3 includes no solvent known as a human health hazard at levels normally accepted in pharmaceuticals." Class 1 drugs "should not be employed in the manufacture of drug substances, excipients, and drug products because of their unacceptable toxicity or their deleterious environmental effect." Class 2 drugs "should be limited in pharmaceutical products because of their inherent toxicity." However, it's the Class 4 drugs that, IMO, provide a nice clue about the FDA's bias toward DMSO. In this document, Class 4 drugs are described as "Solvents for Which No Adequate Toxicological Data Were Found" By extension this description of Class 4 drugs implies that toxicological data DOES EXIST for Class 3 drugs, which includes DMSO. On the basis of this toxicological data, the FDA has classified DMSO as being at the safest level of its scale for human pharmaceuticals. So there IS a bias. The bias however, is not one of danger, but clearly, safety. As DI7026 pointed out on SH, DMSO has been placed in the same category as ethanol, which is 5% of the average beer we drink. Unless some renegade at the FDA has clandestinely slipped DMSO on to that list without the knowledge of Agency, then I would suggest the FDA is not harbouring any fears of the substance melting away human tissue, Russet! joe