4 ms·

This is just throwing around a lot of irrelevant details to obscure the fact that your original statement violates the dimensional analysis smell test -- I coul

This is just throwing around a lot of irrelevant details to obscure the fact that your original statement violates the dimensional analysis smell test -- I could make a shitty prodrug of LSD where the threshold dose is 1g instead of 50ug, but you wouldn't expect the 1g version to be less sensitive to a 25% change because it's "less potent." If you wanted to give examples of a drug where a 25% change is a big concern then warfarin or synthroid are much better examples than LSD. As it turns out, you know your shit, but it is still a sloppy statement.

civilitty 9y ago
I tried explaining why you are wrong but I give up. You are incapable of accepting basic facts about biological systems and neuroscience that have been known for many decades, no matter how hard I try to explain it to you. Your "dimensional analysis smell test" is entirely idiotic in the face of those basic facts as accepted by the entire medical and biological research fields. Please don't talk about pharmacology. Period. You don't know what you are talking about and someone might make the mistake of believing otherwise and do something dangerous.
- sevenfive 9y ago
  This is what you said: > There are a few compounds (like fentanyl or LSD) where the dosages are so small and the compound so potent that 10-25% makes a difference but for the majority, precision isn't that critical. As in, typical dosages for fent or LSD are on the order of micrograms, so we expect them to be sensitive to a 25% change, for other drugs where a typical dose is measured in mg or grams, 25% is less likely to be a big deal, etc. This is the only way to interpret what you wrote, and it doesn't make sense. No such trend exists. None of the "basic facts" which you "explained" above (which I already knew) go anywhere near supporting this assertion. Put another way, if you know the [A]50 you know one point on the dose-response curve, but in general that tells you nothing about the slope or shape of the curve near that point. Judging from your comment history, you are not an actual doctor or biomed researcher, just a programmer in that industry. Which makes your teeth-gnashing about what an authority you are a tad less persuasive.

civilitty 9y ago

I tried explaining why you are wrong but I give up. You are incapable of accepting basic facts about biological systems and neuroscience that have been known for many decades, no matter how hard I try to explain it to you. Your "dimensional analysis smell test" is entirely idiotic in the face of those basic facts as accepted by the entire medical and biological research fields. Please don't talk about pharmacology. Period. You don't know what you are talking about and someone might make the mistake of believing otherwise and do something dangerous.

sevenfive 9y ago
This is what you said: > There are a few compounds (like fentanyl or LSD) where the dosages are so small and the compound so potent that 10-25% makes a difference but for the majority, precision isn't that critical. As in, typical dosages for fent or LSD are on the order of micrograms, so we expect them to be sensitive to a 25% change, for other drugs where a typical dose is measured in mg or grams, 25% is less likely to be a big deal, etc. This is the only way to interpret what you wrote, and it doesn't make sense. No such trend exists. None of the "basic facts" which you "explained" above (which I already knew) go anywhere near supporting this assertion. Put another way, if you know the [A]50 you know one point on the dose-response curve, but in general that tells you nothing about the slope or shape of the curve near that point. Judging from your comment history, you are not an actual doctor or biomed researcher, just a programmer in that industry. Which makes your teeth-gnashing about what an authority you are a tad less persuasive.