Talk:Gabapentinoid

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gabapentinoid article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

Pharmacology Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chemicals Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.ChemicalsWikipedia:WikiProject ChemicalsTemplate:WikiProject Chemicalschemicals articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine: Psychiatry Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Psychiatry portal This article is supported by the Psychiatry task force.

Gabapentinoid? I believe this is incorrect, see below...

As per my understanding of chemistry, as suggested by the discernation of a derivative and structural analogue; would make that of a medication with a similar structure to gabapentinoids the primary criterion...not whether or not they are in terms of pharmacodynamics similar, in terms of mechanism of action. Sic, excluding phenibut from being that of a gabapentinoid; as the only similar feature is the inclusion of the gabba-aminobutryic acid amino group; however, lacks the phenyl group or aromatic heterocyclic compound that GABA reacted with phenylacetic acid is derived from...thus; the primary precursor is GABA and beta-phenyl-gamma-aminobutyric acid is thus, the derivative...reiterating that it is indeed that of a derivative, rather, than that of a gabapentinoid. It could be argued because both phenibut and pregabalin share some similar qualities in terms of mechanism of action and that of the GABA molecule that it could be both...however, which would be the primary quality? The pharmacologist and chemist could argue all day...nature versus nurture?

This is due to the ambiguity of the recent distinction between that of a derivative and structural analog in chemistry and also pharmacology; and was thus coined separate identifying terminologies as a result. Structural analogues are drugs similar in structure, making them just that: analogues; whilst, drugs only similar in mechanism of action would be that of derivatives; derived from a similar compound or derived from a precursor compound by that of a chemical reaction, or thought to act similarly to another compound; i.e., the two separate terms opioid and opiate are used as an example, as an opioid is semi/fully synthetic and only a derivative in terms of sharing a similar mechanism of action per modulating the Mu-Opioid Receptor, to that of an opiate, which does the same, however, is natural to nature in the sense that it is derived from an alkaloid from p. Somniferum.

This is at least my understanding...

KR — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.49.26.127 (talk) 00:52, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]