The elements of materia medica and therapeutics

What is the Chinese caterpillar fungusOphiocordyceps sinensis(Ophiocordycipitaceae)?

“…Pegler et al (1994) gave a slightly different name Hea Tsaon Tsong Chung referring to Reeves. Besides that, Robin (1853) and Pereira (1854) mentioned the name as Hea Tsao Taong Chung and Hea Tsaou Taong Chung, respectively, referring to Westwood (1842). Actually, Westwood (1842) did not give any name, but only referred to different sources, such as du Halde (1736), Rees's Cyclopaedia and personal communication with Reeves.…”

“…Pereira (1843) more accurately described that the "plant" grew from the back part of the neck (Cooke 1892). Pereira (1854) first classified the host larva as a lepidopteran insect and reported that, according to Mr. Doubleday, the insect was a species of Agrotis. Later, Gray (1858) classified the insect as Gortyna belonging to the family Noctuidae.…”

“…Mycologists started to research this fungus around the middle of the nineteenth century. Although O. sinensis is traditionally called " (dongchong xiacao)" in Chinese, its equivalent English term was first coined by Pereira (1843) as summer-plant winter-worm or summer-plant, winter-insect (Pereira 1854;Gray 1858). At present, it is more commonly known as Chinese caterpillar fungus, caterpillar fungus, Chinese insect herb, insect herb or Cordyceps mushroom in English.…”

Das Phänomen der steirischen Arsenikesser aus literarischer, chemisch‐toxikologischer und wissenschaftshistorischer Sicht – “Strong Poison” oder “Milchmädchenrechnung”?

“…Aufgrund solcher Ungereimtheiten wurden von Tschudis Berichte34, 35 überaus kontrovers aufgenommen 6. 36, 49–61 Während von Bibra,6 Johnston36 und Husband49, 50 von Tschudis Behauptungen als unbestreitbare Tatsachen anerkannten, hält Kesteven56–58 sie für “ starken Tobak ”62 und schreibt unter Berufung auf Taylor,59 Christison60 und Pereira:61 “ the story of the Styrian arsenic‐eaters is not only unsupported by adequate testimony , but is inconsistent , improbable , and utterly incredible ”,58 was er durch folgende Punkte begründet.…”

“…Przygoda et al 13. bemerken korrekterweise: “ Merely to deny the phenomenon of the Styrian arsenic eaters on the grounds of ‘ common sense’ is not scientifically tenable .”13 Aber genau dies war die Vorgehensweise der Kritiker45, 56–61, 101 dieser Legende.…”