Psycho-Babble Medication | about biological treatments | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Re: Ecstasy safely converted and prescribed? Dave001

Posted by Larry Hoover on August 31, 2004, at 10:48:57

In reply to Re: Ecstasy safely converted and prescribed? Larry Hoover, posted by Dave001 on August 31, 2004, at 10:29:18

> > I appreciate the digression into uncertainties of estimate. There are always assumptions made in cross-species comparisons, of course. There are
> And thus the need to correct false assumptions, such as a 1:1 association with human metabolic rate. ;-)

Indeed. Inter-species safety factors that I have worked with have been ten-fold, or hundred-fold, in different circumstances. We don't know that those safety factors are necessary. They arise from prudence. Overdosing a rat to produce neuronal damage is not generalizable, even with an a priori conversion factor. We're simpling being prudent.

> > also different ways to estimate HED (I assume yours is BW to the 2/3 power, rather than the metabolic parameter BW to the 3/4). Primate
> It is generally preferable to use standardized conversion factors which have demonstrated reasonable accuracy. Using generic formulas is usually is only advisable if the species is not listed or if the weight falls outside of the specified ranges.

I was speaking to the EPA formulae for HED. The body area formula is the BW ^2/3 formula. I'd welcome another reference, for pharmacokinetic conversions, if you have one handy.

> These are the methods used by drug companies when extrapolating from animal data to determine initial human doses.

For phase one studies, which are later revised from empirical evidence. I'm sure there are variances from the 0.16 ratio, used a priori.

> > studies are probably more applicable, and the same pattern is found as in the rats. I.e. only extremely high doses, or recurrent use without sufficient recovery time, lead to measurable neuronal damage or changes in neurotransmitter concentrations. Another variable to consider is antioxidant status, and I wonder if e.g. ravers aren't a little more likely to eat poorly?
> >
> Quite possibly. I would imagine the body naturally kicks the production of antioxidant enzymes such as superoxide dismutase, glutathione peroxidase, and catalase, etc., into full gear in the presence of such toxins.

Perhaps, if nutrient stores are up to it. Antioxidants are sacrificial. They are consumed, so the physiological stress passes into distinct realms depending on antioxidant capacity at baseline. That was the conclusion of the authors of the rat study, that different outcomes are predicated by those thresholds of depletion.

> > By no means was I suggesting the referenced article was conclusive, but merely suggestive. There is a toxic threshold, and the issue of exceeding that threshold is not clearly defined in humans.
> My comments were not intended to make any inference regarding the toxicity of MDMA.
> Dave






Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post

Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.


Start a new thread

Google www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Medication | Framed

poster:Larry Hoover thread:383476