The slopes of the log dose-response lines were significantly different for these two products indicating that their modcs of action in stimulating pepsin may not be identical.3. The outputs of pepsin following GIH and synthetic secretin were similar. Both these secreting stimulated the secretion of pepsin when infused in doses which stimulated the pancreas supramaximally. The less pure product Boots secretin evoked significantly higher peptic responses at doses submaximal for pancreatic stimulation, suggesting that a substance other than secretin exists in Boots preparations which contributes significantly to the overall output of pepsin in response to this product. The peptic response which was accompanied by a slight increase in acid output, but without any increase in pancreatic lipolytic activity, was not inhibited by atropine. This substance which is not present in highly purified GIH secretin does not appear to be cholic acid, gastrin, pancreozymin, glucagon or insulin.
3PHY 258 64 J. M. BRAGANZA, H. T. HOWAT AND G. H. KAY 4. The possibility that a vasodilator substance is present in Boots secretin which by expanding the splanchnic bed increases the concentration of secretin at target sites in the stomach and pancreas seems unlikely, as the flow of pancreatic juice does not increase proportionately with the vast increase in pepsin. A vasodilator substance which specifically affects the gastric vasculature remains a theoretical but unlikely explanation for our observation.