[One of the authors responds]
I absolutely agree with Dr. Sara's assessment of the typographical error in our article, but please don't blame the peer review system. The correct value of the minim was quoted in the reviewed manuscript and altered when the proofs became available. I actually corrected it in correspondence with the editor, but somehow the change was not incorporated in the final version of the article. I am sure that the pharmacist of the era would have picked up such a gross error in the compounding. I might add that the symbols for other units of measure, such as the dram, are not available in modern fonts and were not included in the final draft of the article.