I n this essay I want to follow a train of thought that has occupied me, on and off, over the last 25 years. Generally, the essay is about trying to develop bioassays into instruments for pharmacological analysis. Specifically, I want first to rerun the discovery and classification of histamine Hz-receptor antagonists and then to see how much that classification has been useful in analyzing the physiological control of gastric oxyncic cell secretion. Bioassays based on intact tissues in vitro have some advantages over other types of assays. Thus, interactions between receptors expressed on the same cells can be studied directly, unlike studies based on radioligand binding in tissue homogenates or those using cloned receptors expressed on naive cells. Moreover, interactions between different cells in a tissue, organized in physiological format, can be studied in a way not possible with assays based on cell suspensions or tissue culture. However, these advantages of retained complexity are offset by the impenetrable “black box” lying between the initial pharmacological interaction with the tissue and the final physiological change in the state of the tissue. In spite of this, pharmacologists have two tactics open to them. First, they can simplify their systems by using native ligands to light up specific classes of proteins, enzymes, receptors, transporters, and so forth. Then they can use thought experiments to work out their expectations for outcomes of intera.ctions between native and foreign ligands and these specific molecular systems, according to assumed chemical rules. In this way, they design pharmacological models that relate hypothetical chemical interactions to measured physiological effects. The models then specify appropriate experimental designs to try to evaluate the model. Invariably, these designs call for the measurement of complete concentration-effect (or dose-response) relations. Usually these curves are symmetrical sigmoids in semilogarithmic space and can be uniquely characterized by three parameters; the potency (or dose for half-maximal effect), the amplitude (or maximum), and the slope (or sensitivity). These parameters are capable of independent variation and reflect significant changes of state in the system. Our models reflect these changes. In recent years, my group has designed a small library of explanatory models. My group, from the point of view of this essay, has included James Angus, Paul Leff, Nigel Shankley, and Nicola Welsh. My interest in histamine and gastric secretion started about 40 years ago. Following the discovery that 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) was found in high concentration in the gastric mucosa, Adam Smith and I studied its effects on gastric secretion. We found that 5-HT produced an increase in mucus secretion and an inhibition of histamine-stimulated acid secretion.’ We explored this phenomenon for a while but mainly from the point of view of its physiological implications. However, long after the project ended I was still imprinted with an enthusiasm for the physiology and pharmacology of gastric oxyntic cell secretion. At that time, the well-known failure of the antihistamine drugs to block histamine-stimulated acid secretion had no message for me. However, the discovery of adrenaline P-receptor antagonists changed all that. The parallels between the pharmacology of histamine and adrenaline turned out to be quite striking.’ Antagonists to both of these agents, the antiadrenalines and antihistamines, were being discovered and characterized from the middle thirties onwards. These two classes of drugs shared some features. As a class, the antiadrenaline drugs were not obvious analogues of adrenaline nor were they structurally related to each