Общая фармакология
Clothes and other ornamentation such as hair and jewellery has for a long time been considered a way of displaying one’s place in society and one’s taste. For centuries now people have been coming up with ways to distinguish themselves from the crowd, either by their personal preferences or by their position which was, in turn, displayed by what they wore and how they did their hair. This is also largely the case for Ancient Rome; however, it is necessary to mention that this is as ambiguous a topic as any connected to the ancient world due to the small amounts of evidence available. Also, the multitude of different fashions present throughout the existence of ancient Rome makes it hard to concentrate on the trends that were the most significant for the display of status, so the time frame discussed in this essay is the so-called golden age of Rome – 1st century BCE to 1st century CE; it is possible to derive the general fashions of the time and to follow customs such as purple edges on the toga for the people of note (senators, knights). Most of the evidence used for this study is passing comments. Nevertheless, it is possible to grasp the extent to which the Romans wished for the ability to display their position and wealth to other citizens - Roman sumptuary laws were originally put in place to ensure that there would be no excessive spending on luxury items in banquets and garment, but ultimately led to the somewhat controlled dress – this hints at the fact that Roman dress was an official indicator of the hierarchical position of the wearer. From the evidence available it is apparent that it was, indeed, possible, to distinguish between a merchant and a senator, a soldier and a general, a married woman and a young girl. There were set ways of showing which class you belonged to, how old you were and sometimes even what job you had. However, it remains important to discuss exactly how significant this kind of fashion was for Romans by going through what were the ways in which they made themselves distinguishable and how important public image was to people of status.
Compared to the modern world, the significance of public image and appearances can even seem somewhat astounding. Rome seems to be the age when public performances and speeches were of the outmost importance. Rome was, in fact, all about public recognition – the love of the people was something that many people of office hoped for, and many went to outstanding lengths to achieve it (think of the Gracchi brothers, who paid with their lives for the policies they adopted as populares); what a Roman citizen did was, most of the time, directly or indirectly, aimed at other Roman citizens. In Imperial times, the emperors, who were the most powerful and high-ranking members of society and no one could be more visible than them[1], considered public image highly important and paid close attention to the fact that they were always in the picture, either physically or through their images (on coins, for example); public recognition was essential. Many generals longed for the ultimate prize from the state – the Triumph, which was a public recognition of the fact that a general has gained a great military success, usually completed a foreign war. There were instances where people’s preferences (and, therefore, votes) depended on the public image of the person. Cicero, when talking about the men of Rome, says: ‘there was nothing of which they should more beware than the temptations of idleness and inactivity’[2]; some took this advice more seriously than others. In the political competition between Sulla and Marius, the latter was experiencing a downfall in 88 BCE, and when it was suggested that he retired to Campania and age gracefully he replied ‘by starting on a very public workout <…> every day he was on the training ground, pushing himself to the limit’[3]. People aiming for office had to keep themselves looking young and fit – this created an impression that they were capable of being more active in office, too. Many chose a person to look up to and look like to create a similar attitude towards themselves – one of the most famous cases is the story of Pompey Maximus and Alexander the Great where Pompey made every effort to look like his hero, Alexander, had his cloak, took a historian with him on campaigns and even did his hair in a similar style[4] out of the desire to not only be associated with the famous general but also to look as young as Alexander. Of course, this attitude towards public appearance is still somewhat present nowadays; however, everything points towards the fact that in ancient Rome this was much more prominent. Quintilian writes in his works: ‘there is no special garb peculiar to the orator, but his dress comes more under the public eye than that of other men. It should, therefore, be distinguished and manly, as, indeed, it ought to be with all men of position’[5]; Quintilian was a respected rhetorician who taught in schools – it is fair to assume therefore that the importance of appearance was reared from childhood. From the importance of the way one looks in public it is inevitable that the question of clothing derives since much of it was symbolic of authority (or the lack of such), which was usually connected to the distinctiveness of the garment, for example, again, the purple edges of the toga. This was very exclusive, making this dress capable to underline the difference between ranks and being mostly about public display.
‘Toga; symbol of <…> the natural superiority of a people born to rule’[6]. In Rome, this was most likely the most significant garment in terms of displaying status of the person wearing it. It was the one that was aimed the most at public presentation, and is an example of a dress where the importance of appearance overrides comfort. There were different ways in which this is shown. The folds of the toga, for example, were usually arranged by slaves the night before an important occasion, and pieces of lead would be sewn into the fabric to keep the folds in shape. This restricted movement even further (the movement was already hindered since the toga itself was made of heavy woollen material and out of one piece of semicircular material and therefore required the wearer to hold it up with one arm). There was a special slave designated to arrange the folds of the toga in a careful manner – a vestiplicus – which points to the fact that the toga and the garment altogether played a big role in the person’s public appearance. Persius talks about ‘cretata ambitio’ [7], referring to the bright white garment the candidates for elections wore while canvassing support. This gave start to the term ‘candidate’, deriving from the Latin ‘candidus’ for ‘white’ or ‘bright’[8], and is yet another way of differentiating someone of office (even if only in the future) from the general public. The toga with the clavus (the purple edge) is known as toga praetexta and is also a significant way of separating people of note from the crowd; these included the latus clavus for the senators (one broad stripe) and the angustus clavus for the equites (two narrower stripes). Other people such as some priests and free-born boys who have not yet come of age had the right to this toga praetexta. The broad purple edge on the toga allowed other people to recognise the status of the wearer, whether it was his senatorship or his age, and therefore became the symbol of their position and something to long for. Like the toga praetexta, the toga virilis (otherwise known as toga pura - a garment restricted to the male population of Rome that has reached the age of political majority[9]) which served as a symbol of citizenship or coming of a mature age, was a cause for celebration in the case of teenage boys who passed into maturity, and was worn by most Roman men of age on formal occasions. There was another toga, which was, most likely, created only for the display of status in the first place – toga picta. This was the toga worn by the people of highest achievement only on special occasions, such as by the Praetor Urbanus during the Ludi Apollinares. This toga that was not only fully died purple but also had golden embroidery, and made it’s wearer instantly recognisable. It was a very expensive garment, of course – this was also one of the reasons it was only worn by the people of highest honour – the genuine purple dye, murex, comes from a rare mollusc, and is expensive to obtain. Julius Caesar was the first man to wear a whole genuine purple toga as a sign of the highest dignity; at some points in time whole imitation purple togas were in fashion (sometimes even the slaves’ clothes were dyed imitation purple – ‘the whortleberry is grown in Gaul to supply purple dye for slaves’ clothes’[10], but whole genuine purple togas still remained the privilege of the most powerful. The fact that such togas were not only symbolic of power but were also considered a privilege shows the immense importance that the Romans gave drapery as a symbol of status. The toga was not simply a dress for the Romans, but it served as a representation of ambition and power of Rome, as Virgil wrote: ‘ Romanos rerum dominos gentemque togatam ’[11]. Later on, when the toga itself was beginning to disappear from everyday wear and more emphasis was put on the symbolic meaning of it, appearance in court without it (or even failure to wear it in a proper and tidy manner) excited criticism[12] or was even considered illegal[13]. This became a serious offence after Augustus (who did not consider the toga comfortable but was obliged to wear it to his duties as a politician[14]), outraged at seeing a meeting of citizens without the toga, gave orders to the aediles that not one citizen was to appear in the Forum dressed inappropriately[15]. However, even before this incident, appearance in public in a foreign dress was considered contempt for the Roman people[16]. The toga was also the image of civilian power, which can also be interpreted as the power of peace. This is referred to by Cicero: ‘ cedant arma togae’ [17]; the Roman citizens themselves were sometimes referred to as togati (or ‘the toga-wearers’). Another kind of toga, toga pulla, was worn not to demonstrate the wearer’s status or wealth, but his personal opinions. This was the only dark toga that was publically worn by the aristocratic community in Rome (on other public occasions the men always wore white to distinguish themselves from the poor and the slaves who wore natural brown colours of cloth), either in mourning or to show protest. For example, such incident occurred after Cicero’s exile in 58 BCE – the senate wore the togae pullae as a sign of objection to this decision by P. Clodius. Therefore one can see that the toga did not only serve as a display of status and position of the person, but also conveyed multiple symbolic meanings.
The military dress in Rome was as subject to division as the civic wear since people within the military were officially divided into ranks. Not only could the soldiers be distinguished from the common citizens, but the generals also had distinctive garments that symbolised their power. A regular soldier wore a short tunic, which was more practical than a toga, (which was, anyway, seen as a garment of peace, served as an image of civilian power and was, as discussed, reserved for the Roman citizens at peace). It was the length of the tunic that was crucial in recognising a Roman soldier – the male citizens wore their tunics (that replaced the togas in everyday life) to midcalf[18], and the women – at floor length[19]; it was the military who, out of necessity to have unrestricted movement, wore their garments shorter. Another distinctive feature of the military dress was the sagum (also known as the sagulum) – the short military cloak worn above the armour. Citizens, too, wore cloaks for protection in bad weather, but it was, again, the length of the sagum that made the soldiers stand out. However, these distinctions came through not as much out of the desire to be recognised, but out of necessity – the armour and the short dress were essential in times of war. Nevertheless, the army, too, had their exclusive costume. This was the paludamentum (originally referred to as trabea), a cloak or a cape fastened at one shoulder. This was the garment of the generals (the were sometimes even referred to by the term ‘paludati’[20] or ‘dressed in a war-like manner’); it was symbolic of war – putting on a paludamentum was a ceremonial act of setting out to war[21] and it was customary to take it off upon finishing war and entering Rome in a toga. In Imperial times, when the military commandership was reserved for the emperor, ‘the paludamentum became the sign of imperial dignity’[22] and many emperors were, in fact, pictured wearing it in sculpture (see fig. 1 - Augustus of Prima Porta) or in coinage (emperor Septimius Severus and his son were usually depicted in this dress[23] – see fig. 2 Septimius on a medallion 194 CE). It was the image that the emperors themselves wished to be seen by – coins were the most widespread image at the time and were a very effective way of asserting authority (the tradition of putting faces of living individuals of office started by Julius Caesar did not die out after his assassination and, in fact, continues until the modern day). This garment was, therefore, what they chose to define themselves and what they thought best displays their power; again, this underlines the significance of Roman ornamentation as a means of displaying status and power. The paludamentum was usually crimson red or purple – a bright colour that stands out; it was important for the supreme commander of the army to not only stand out in battle, but to also establish their dominance over their subordinates. It was this desire to show their power of control that urged them to wear expensive and outstanding dress - this applies not only to the military, but to the Roman society altogether. Thus, even though the members of the army stood out from the crowd unintentionally (i.e. usually without the desire to display their membership of the military) but out of the force of circumstance, they, too, had a garment like the toga praetexta or toga picta. The regular soldiers did not only have the capacity to immediately recognise the importance of the person wearing a paludamentum, but could also look up to them, which is similar to the toga picta of the emperor.
The male dress in Rome concentrated on the attempts to display the social and political power of the wearer; the female attire, on the other hand, usually displayed only the marital status of the woman and the wealth of the woman’s family. The stola, a long, sleeveless tunic made out of undyed wool, was something that Roman women were entitled to wear after marriage; although unfashionable, it became a symbol of marital tradition, and wearing it was a way of proclaiming the woman’s respect towards the customs. Another garment of a respectable woman was a palla, a long cloak worn outside. While unmarried Roman girls could go bareheaded both in and out of doors, the married women of Rome ‘preserved their matronly dignity by covering their heads with a corner of the palla when the wore it in public’[24]. Hence, there were several traditional pieces of clothing associated with married women; it seems that the variety of the general costume of a woman in Rome was quite limited. It was only the material of the cloth that allowed women to display their families’ wealth; it being somewhat difficult to obtain many different fabrics and the limitations of the range of dyes available encouraged women to rely on their hair and jewellery to stand out from other women. Again, the women of ancient Rome were not as much in search for a display of authority as they were looking to add variety to their appearance – as Livy records: ‘elegance, finery, and beautiful clothes are women's badges, in these they find joy and take pride, this our forebears called the women's world’[25]. Nevertheless, there is some evidence of the women longing to display their marital status and personal respectability, such as the fact that empresses were wishing to be portrayed in an unstylish and unflattering stola that proclaimed her adherence to the historical convention (for example the empress Livia – see fig. 3). Here, even though the head of the statue is lost, the body of the first Roman empress is draped in an elaborate stola, the symbol of the marital virtue of a reputable Roman matron. Consequently, one can see that although the female dress in Rome was less defined by the laws and customs than the male garments and was given much less importance in terms of display of status, to a degree it was still an illustration of the wearer’s position and gave others the capacity to distinguish higher classes of women from the lower ones.
The accessories in ancient Rome was not simply a prerogative of the females; some items were, in fact, worn exclusively by men. Moreover, these could also help reveal information about the status of the wearer. In fact, while the females were mostly using jewellery to add variety to their everyday appearance and display their husband’s wealth, the male accessories were usually typical of a class or an age. The balteus, for example, was a representative belt of the military, along with the baldric (the latter was worn over one shoulder to carry weapons). The shoes, too, could serve as an indication of the social, or in some cases political, position of the person. Calcei, for example, were ‘the proper footwear of the Roman citizen, which together with the toga formed the national dress’[26], so these were a distinction of a Roman citizen. Calceus senatorius was a black shoe with an ivory insert and was usually worn by senators (hence the name). The caliga, a military sandal, was therefore a prerogative of the members of the army, and was their distinctive garment, along with the shorter tunic, the lorica (the armour) and the baldric. As for the jewellery, the women accepted a wide range of styles and materials (there were many available in the regions controlled by Rome) for various types of decorative objects. The men, however, usually wore only one item of jewellery – a personalised signet ring that was pressed against hot wax to seal important documents. Under the republic, only one ring was allowed[27], and this could only be worn by free men – similarly to the toga, the ring was an indication of the person’s standing as a free man of Rome. This ring could also be a display of the material wealth of the wearer (judging by the material – the wealthiest had their signet rings made of gold, while initially this object would be made out of iron or electrum). Another significant item of jewellery is the bulla – an amulet given to Roman boys nine days after their birth, and was worn as a necklace. It was believed to serve as protection against sickness and evil eye, and was worn by boys until they reached manhood, ceremonially removed it and were granted the right to wear the toga virilis. The bulla became symbolic of protection, and was worn by victorious generals during their triumph. It could, similarly to the signet rings, show the wealth of the wearer – it were usually the legitimate sons of the upper-class who wore bullas made of gold. So, male accessories, comparably to other items of ornamentation such as the toga, could not only display the social and political standing of the person wearing it along with conveying some symbolical meaning, but also, due to the material and the technique in which it was produced, it could serve as an indication of the person’s wealth – the toga held multiple symbolical meanings, but the quality of the dye used was crucial in distinguishing between the common free man (who could wear imitation purple) and the richest (who adorned themselves in murex-dyed garments). Similarly with the signet rings – while it was symbolical of being a Roman free man, the golden rings were only worn by the wealthy.
There is no doubt, however, that another primary use of clothing and other ornamentation was comfort and practicality. There were special garments for bad weather and the clothing, undeniably, served a practical purpose along with the equally important display of status. The paenula, a thick woolen cloak that was worn by soldiers who were sent to a region with a harsh climate, but also was adapted for everyday use by civilians during bad weather and journeys. Also, regular tunics and cloaks were sometimes adapted for a change in weather, for example a cucullus (a hood) was added for extra protection from the wind and the rain. The clothing itself was used not only for the enhancement of public image of the person, but also to keep warm; the emperor Augustus, for example, was said to have worn four tunics in the winter, along with other garments, to keep away the cold[28]. Moreover, there must have been a widespread use of clothing simply for comfort, especially since as the 1st Century CE progressed, the everyday use of the uncomfortable toga and the unfashionable stola was gradually abandoned by the citizens of Rome, especially those living outside the city[29]. Also, the use of jewellery just as a means of adding variety to one’s garment or out of practical necessity (the fibula, for one, was mostly used as a pin or a brooch for the cloak, and served both a decorative and a practical purpose, but is not usually seen as a means of expressing any other status than material prosperity – the wealth of the person could, no doubt, be deduced from the material of the fibula). Nevertheless, even though the comfort and the practicality of clothes was significant, the use of attire to display the standing of the person in society still remained key, as the symbolism of the attires such as the toga or the paludamentum remained relevant.
Even though there is no doubt that clothing was used fundamentally out of the search for comfort, the Roman society placed an enormous amount of significance upon the use of dress and accessories as illustrations of one’s position in society, both political and civic. The Romans were prepared to dress distinctively, putting comfort aside, for example with the heavy and restricting toga. Nowadays it is striking that the Romans had a national dress of the toga and the calcei, and they considered this garment defining of their people. ‘Dress for a Roman often, if not primarily, signified rank, status, office, or authority’[30], and the more distinctive and outstanding the garment was, the more likely that the person wearing it was very powerful – the dress of the poor and the slaves were usually not distinctive at all (they mostly wore undyed cloth). It was possible to tell key things about the person by their garment, and the garment itself became symbolic of the positions that they corresponded to. In fact, Rome was the most prominent first example of rank being displayed by costume - ‘the hierarchic, symbolic use of dress as a uniform or costume is part of Rome's legacy to Western civilization’[31]. It is also important that both men and women of age had the right to wear their characteristically Roman civic garments, or habitus patrius et civilis [32], and when they did wear this dress in public it did not only allow the others to recognise the people’s belonging to the Roman citizens, but also the people themselves ‘demonstrated their membership in a defined and bounded community, the gens Romana [33] ’ [34]. The clothes for a Roman was not simply a way of expressing personal style – it provided a tangible form for class and hierarchical division, and visibly highlighted those who had power, either political or military. However, astonishingly, the Roman dress could also unify the body of the Roman people as well as highlight the hierarchical distinctions. The fact that it was the toga that became the symbol of the power of the Roman citizens leads to thinking that it was the garment that, in the mind of a Roman, served as a unification of the class. Perhaps, the toga emphasised the role of Roman men in the civic life of the city (as much as the stola did for women). Along with focusing attention on the fact that the wearer is aware of his civic duties, the garments in ancient Rome simply allowed the others to instantly recognise their position in life – age, political position, social status, wealth and even sometimes occupation were deductable from their formal attire. In fact, public recognition of one’s status was inseparable from actually having it, since public image in Rome was very significant. In the beginning of this essay it was unclear how much emphasis Romans put on personal ornamentation as a means of displaying status; it is now a question what the Roman people considered more important in their attire, comfort and practicality or distinctiveness. There is no doubt that it was one of the key applications of personal adornment to define the person wearing it and to show the rest of the people his standing. The items of clothing, some more than others, held various symbolic meanings, creating the impression that many costumes were, in fact, mostly ceremonial and were mainly used in public appearances. This highlights the fact that Roman dress was far from being simply ornamental or practical. The significance of personal ornamentation of a Roman in terms of the display of personal position and standing was so great that it is simply impossible to look on Roman dress as if just on fashion; the dress was the definition and the reflection of the social structure of Rome.
Bibliography
Primary sources:
-Quintilian, Institutio Oratoria -Persius, Satires -Virgil, Aeneid -Cicero, Pro Rabirio Perduellionis Reo; De Officiis -Suetonius, Life of Augustus; Life of Caligula; Life of Tiberius - Livy, History of Rome -Capito, In Macrobius - Ovid, Art of Love -Pliny the Elder, Natural History -Isidorus, Orig. Secondary sources:
-U. E. Paoli, Rome, It’s Life and Customs -B. Payne, History of Costume from the Ancient Egyptians to the Twentieth Century -A. McCullough, Gender and Public Image in Imperial Rome - The Dictionary of Roman Coins -The Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities -The works of C. Vout -L. Bonfante, The World of Roman Costume -J. Edmondston, Public Dress and Social Control in Late Republican and Early Imperial Rome -T. Holland, Rubicon, the Triumph and Tragedy of the Roman Empire -Guhl and Koher??
Websites used:
http://www.forumancientcoins.com/numiswiki/view.asp?key=paludamentum http://www.vroma.org/~bmcmanus/clothing2.html http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Quintilian/Institutio_Oratoria/11C*.html#3 http://www.wildwinds.com/coins/ric/septimius_severus/i.html http://www.allaboutgemstones.com/jewelry_history_ancient_roman.html http://www.ancientresource.com/lots/ancient_jewelry/jewelry_rings.html http://www.roman-colosseum.info/roman-army/roman-tribune.htm Illustrations
Figure 1 Figure 2
[1] Anna McCullough, Gender and Public Image in Imperial Rome, abstract [2] Cicero, De Officiis, 1.123 as cited by Tom Holland, Rubicon [3] Tom Holland, Rubicon, the Triumph and Tragedy of the Roman Republic, Ch. 3 [4] Ibid., Ch. 8 [5] Quintilian, Institutio Oratoria, book XI, chapter 3, 137 [6] U. E. Paoli, Rome, It’s Life and Customs, Ch. VII [7] Persius, Satires, v. 177: “Chalked ambition” [8] Isidorus, Orig., XIX 24.6 as cited by The Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities [9] Payne, Blanche: History of Costume from the Ancient Egyptians to the Twentieth Century [10] Pliny the Elder, Natural History [11] Virgil, Aen. I, 282: “Romans, the lords of the world, the toga-wearing race” [12] Quintilian, Institutio Oratoria, book XI, chapter 3, 139 [13] M. T. Cicero, Pro Rabirio Perduellionis Reo: "Rabirius <..> was now accused of. <..> wearing the dress of an Egyptian." [14] U. E. Paoli, Rome, It’s Life and Customs, Ch. VII [15] Suetonius, Life of Augustus, 40.5 [16] U. E. Paoli, Rome, It’s Life and Customs, Ch. VII [17] Cicero, De Officiis: lit. “let all arms yield to the toga”, “may peace replace war” [18] Juvenal, Satires, 6.434-456: ‘If she wants to appear so learned and eloquent, she should shorten her tunic to midcalf!’ – only appropriate for men to be learned; tunic to midcalf is a man’s garment [19] Ovid, Art of Love, 1.31-34: ‘Respectable ladies, the kind who wear hairbands and ankle-length skirts, are hereby warned off’ [20] http://www.roman-colosseum.info/roman-army/roman-tribune.htm [21] Ibid. [22] Guhl and Koher [23] The dictionary of Roman coins, p. 597 [24] U. E. Paoli, Rome, It’s Life and Customs, Ch. VII [25] Livy, History of Rome, 34.5 – argument for the repeal of the Oppian laws, 195 BCE [26] U. E. Paoli, Rome, It’s Life and Customs, Ch. VII [27] Atrius Capito, In Macrobius, VII 13, 12. [28] Suetonius, Life of Augustus, 82, as sited by The Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities, p. 1174 [29] Caroline Vout, 1996, as cited by Jonathan Edmondston, Public Dress and Social Control in Late Republican and Early Imperial Rome [30] Larissa Bonfante, The World of Roman Costume, p. 5 [31] Ibid. [32] Suetonius, Life of Caligula, 52.1 cf. Life of Tiberius, 13.1 [33] “the Roman people” [34] Jonathan Edmondston, Public Dress and Social Control in Late Republican and Early Imperial Rome Общая фармакология 1. Больной с хронической сердечной недостаточностью в течении нескольких месяцев принимал в амбулаторных условиях дигоксин. На определенном этапе лечения у него возникли симптомы передозировки препарата. Какое явление лежит в основе развития этого осложнения? А. Привыкание В. Сенсибилизация С. Функциональная кумуляция Д. Тахифилаксия *Е. Материальная кумуляция 2. Перед операцией по поводу сопоставления отломков верхней челюсти для нейролептанальгезии в комбинации с анальгетиком фентанилом применили нейролептик дроперидол. Какой вид взаимодействия лекарственных средств был использован? *A Потенцированный синергизм B Аддитивный синергизм C Синергоантагонизм D Антагонизм конкурентный E Антагонизм неконкурентный 3. Больной, принимавший по поводу невроза сибазон (диазепам), пожаловался на зубную боль. Врач назначил ему болеутоляющее средство в дозе, меньшей средней терапевтической. Какое явление принял во внимание врач, снижая дозу препарата? * A Потенцирование B Суммация C Кумуляция D Лекарственная зависимость E Толерантность 4. Больному была проведена операция по поводу ранения в живот с использованием тубокурарина. В конце операции, когда дыхание восстановилось, больному ввели гентамицин. Неожиданно наступили остановка дыхания и расслабление скелетных мышц. Какой эффект лежит в основе этого явления? А. Антагонизм В. Кумуляция С. Сенсибилизация Д. Привыкание *Е. Потенцирование 5. Для лечения ксеростомии больному был назначен пилокарпина гидрохлорид в каплях внутрь. Больной нарушал режим лечения: у него возникли брадикардия, бронхоспазм, болезненное усиление перистальтики, обильное потоотделение, слюнотечение, сужение зрачков и спазм аккомодации. Для устранения симптоматики назначен атропина сульфат. Какой вид взаимодействия имеет место между указанными препаратами? *A Антагонизм B Синергизм C Кумуляция D Тахифилаксия E Привыкание 6. Во время барбитурового наркоза у больного 65 лет начало развиваться угнетение дыхания. Анестезиолог сделал внутривенную инъекцию 10 мл 0,5% раствора бемегрида. Состояние больного улучшилось, объем легочной вентиляции увеличился. Какое явление лежит в основе взаимодействия этих препаратов? А. Синергизм прямой В Антагонизм непрямой С. Антагонизм односторонний *Д. Антагонизм прямой Е. Синергизм непрямой 7. В наркологическое отделение госпитализирован больной с диагнозом – морфинизм. Врач отметил снижение фармакологической активности морфина. Как называется явление, когда уменьшается эффективность препарата при повторном введении? А. Кумуляция В. Тахифилаксия С. Аллергия *Д. Привыкание Е. Антагонизм 8. Больной, ощутив предвестники приступа бронхиальной астмы, принял без контроля врача несколько таблеток внутрь через короткие промежутки времени. Однако кратковременное улучшение состояния отметил только после приема первых двух таблеток. Следующие приема препарата не улучшили его состояние. Каким явлением обусловлено снижение эффекта препарата? А. Привыкание Б. Кумуляция С. Зависимость *Д. Тахифилаксия Е. Идиосинкразия 9. Больной острым ринитом закапывает нос раствором эфедрина. Почувствовав облегчение, он ускорил закапывание через каждые 15-20 минут, но от этого улучшение не наступило: дыхание осталось затрудненным. С каким из перечисленных процессов связано это явление? *A Тахифилаксия B Кумуляция C Потенцирование D Сенсибилизация E Лекарственная зависимость 10. При длительном использовании морфина гидрохлорида, у онкобольного возникли явления медикаментозной зависимости. Какими критериями характеризуется данное явление? *A.Непреодолимое желание повторного использования данного лекарственного средства B. Усилением эффекта при повторном введении C. Развитием кумуляции D. Уменьшением эффекта при повторном введении E. Повышением чувствительности организма к данному лекарственному средству 11. Человек, долго принимавший лекарства не может прекратить его использование, так как при этом возникают нарушения психических и соматических функций. Как называется синдром, возникающий при отказе от приема лекарственного вещества? А. Идиосинкразия В. Кумуляция С. Тахифилаксия *Д. Абстенция Е. Сенсибилизация 12. Известно, что у людей с генетически обусловленной недостаточностью глюкозо-6-фосфатдегидрогеназы эритроцитов, в ответ на назначение некоторых противомалярийных препаратов может развиться гемолиз эритроцитов. Как называется такой тип реакции на лекарственные препараты? А. Сенсибилизация В. Тахифилаксия С. Толерантность *Д. Идиосинкразия Е. Аллергия 13. У больного, который долгое время принимал глюкокортикоиды, при внезапном прекращении приема препарата развился феномен отмены. В чем суть этого явления? *А. Выпадение физиологической функции в результате длительного приема препарата, а затем его внезапной отмены В. Повышение эффекта лекарственного средства при повторном его приеме С. Обострение патологического процесса D. Расторможенность регуляторного процесса или отдельных реакций организма, которые ранее были подавлены лекарственным средством, при внезапной его отмене E. Постепенное ослабление терапевтического действия лекарственного средства при длительном его приеме 14. Больному с целью обезболивания ввели раствор местного анестетика. Через несколько минут у больного возникла одышка, тахикардия, потеря сознания. Какой шок развился у больного? А. Травматический В. Кардиогенный С. Геморрагический Д. Ожоговый *Е. Анафилактический 15. Больному с установленным диагнозом хламидийная пневмония с целью лечения назначено антибиотик доксициклин. Как называется такой вид фармакотерапии? *А. Этиотропная В. Патогенетическая С. Симптоматическая D. Заместительная E. Профилактическая 16. Больному с эрозивно-язвенным стоматитом, сопровождающимся сильным болевым синдромом, врач назначил аппликации раствора лидокаина гидрохлорида. Какой вид терапии имеет место в данном случае? *A Симптоматическая B Патогенетическая C Этиотропная D Заместительная E Гормональная 17. У больного, обратившегося к врачу, диагностирован анацидный гастрит. Для улучшения работы желудка больному назначили таблетки ацидин-пепсина. Какой вид лечения был применен? *A Заместительная терапия B Симптоматическая терапия C Профилактическое применение D Этиотропная терапия E Каузальная терапия 18. У больной после обработки десенных карманов спиртовым раствором йода появилась гиперемия десен, зуд и крапивница. Чем может быть обусловлено указанное побочное действие йода? *A Индивидуальная непереносимость препарата B Влияние на функцию щитовидной железы C Отвлекающее действие D Местно-раздражающий эффект E Влияние на патогенные микроорганизмы 19. В больницу доставлен тяжелобольной без сознания. Врач дал понюхать ему раствор аммиака. Какое действие лежит в основе фармакологического эффекта препарата? *A Рефлекторное действие B Резорбтивное действие C Местное действие D Избирательное действие E Этиотропное действие 20. У больного, обратившегося с жалобами на пронос, диагностировали амебную дизентерию. В комплексное лечение был включен тетрациклин. Какой вид действия назначенного препарата? *A Этиотропное действие B Прямое действие C Рефлекторное действие D Основное действие E Необратимое действие 21. Больная, 54 лет, при приступе стенокардии приняла таблетку нитроглицерина per os, но эффекта не развилось. Какова причина этого явления? *А. Пресистемный метаболизм В. Элиминация С. Резорбция D. Депонирование E. Привыкание 22. Для устранения тревоги перед визитом к стоматологу женщине 24 лет (30 неделя беременности) знакомая посоветовала таблетку диазепама. Однако врач рекомендовал пациентке воздержаться от приема транквилизатора, учитывая возможное неблагоприятное влияние препарата на будущего ребенка. Какой раздел фармакологии изучает особенности влияния препаратов на плод на этом сроке беременности? *А. Перинатальная фармакология В. Хронофармакологии С. Гериатрического фармакология D. Фармакогенетика E. Фармакогнозия
|
Figure 3
