User:Meodipt/2008 talk archive

4-Methylmethcathinone

Another editor has added the "{{prod}}" template to the article 4-Methylmethcathinone, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 12:29, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Aminoalkylindoles

Fantastic! I only just stumbled upon the aminoalkylindoles last week and hadn't had a chance to fully digest the Aung 2000 paper yet. These novel cannabinoids are quite intriguing. I'll try to add some more info if I get a chance this week. Thanks! St3vo (talk) 19:27, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Nice work on new articles!

Hey MeODiPT I'm just dropping by to thank you for the new psychedelic articles (Purdue/Dr. Nichols et al.) you've created. Keep up the good work!--Astavats (talk) 01:44, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Nabitan

Your knowledge of obscure cannabinoids and opioids is fantastic. You are quite right re: unwritten cannabinoid articles, I was mostly just curious about what happened to the drug after stumbling upon the Archer, 1978 paper. Turns out I already had Nabitan watched... I was planning on expanding Naloxazone and starting Naloxonazine and O-1624 next but things have been very busy here. Keep up your excellent work! St3vo (talk) 12:51, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Taranabant

Bah! I don't know how that happened, it's pretty obvious, too...thanks for the catch. In any case, taranabant is interesting indeed - Merck seems to have first mentioned it last April, and they're already finishing Phase III trials - it doesn't even have a Pubchem entry yet. Don't see it getting approved, though, it's got more or less the same nasty anxiety/depression side effects as rimonabant from what I read...I think CB1's just too widely distributed and multi-purposed to just indiscriminately inactivate, but maybe a neutral antagonist would prove more promising than inverse agonists like the 'bants? I guess we'll see. St3vo (talk) 05:49, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

St3vo, this drug is still under clinical trials. Carlo Banez (talk) 12:11, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

RE: Clevudine

Hello. Why did you not create a chemical structure yet for clevudine? :-) Carlo Banez (talk) 12:13, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Because it took me a minute to draw one...look now! Meodipt (talk) 12:14, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Ok. Good job. :-) Carlo Banez (talk) 12:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Epiboxidine

Hi,

Please don't just remove tags without reason; I didn't just put them there for fun. It *does* need a cleanup.

Feel free to discuss it on my talk page if you like, and if there's anything I could do to help.

--  Chzz  ►  09:29, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey there. I've made some changes (hopefully improvements) to the article. I replaced the drugbox with {{Chembox new}}, because I really don't think drugboxes should be in articles on compounds not actually used as medications (whether in humans or animals). I see Chzz was particularly bothered by the question marks in the drugbox, so I hope this is a good solution all around :) Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 20:00, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi,

Thanks for your efforts. Personally, I think it looks much better now. --  Chzz  ►  00:05, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

RE: Cefozopran

Hello. Could you please draw a chemical structure for cefozopran, and add some information on the infobox for this drug. Can you do it? :-) Carlo Banez (talk) 15:27, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Looks like Fvasconcellos beat me to it! I added the CAS number anyway, might have a quick look and see if I can find any other data for it as well. Meodipt (talk) 23:29, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Adminship

I've seen the work you do around here and I'm impressed. Any interest in becoming an administrator? Andre (talk) 06:58, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Piperidylthiambutene

Why have you written " It would be considered an illegal controlled substance analogue in some countries such as the USA, Australia and New Zealand, but is legal in the rest of the world." It either is (reference would be good) or it isn't. "Would" requires further explanation (would be except....) and is unencyclopedic as it stands. dramatic (talk) 21:02, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons

Thank you for uploading images/media to Wikipedia! There is, however, another Wikimedia Foundation project called Wikimedia Commons, a central media repository for all free media. In the future, please consider creating an account and uploading your media there instead. That way, all of the other language Wikipedias can use them too, as well as our many sister projects. This will also allow our visitors to search for, view and use our media in one central location. If you wish to move previous uploads to Commons, see Wikipedia:Moving images to the Commons (you may view images you have previously uploaded by going to your user contributions on the left and choosing the 'image' namespace from the drop down box). Please note that non-free content, such as images claimed as fair use, cannot be uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons. Help us spread the word about Commons by informing other users, and please continue uploading!--OsamaK 06:10, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Pukateine

edited this. ref says it is a dopamine agonist, not antagonist. 70.137.138.55 (talk) 10:47, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Tetrahydropalmatine

Hello, is there any reason why you used another IUPAC name when creating the article than that given in the reference? It was quite some time ago since I took intermediate organic chemistry, so if I ever have learned alcaloid nomenclature I'm a bit rusty on it and haven't tried to understand the difference myself. :-) Tomas e (talk) 11:28, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

I just cut and pasted the name from the PubChem entry for the compound, with complex molecules like this there are generally several ways of naming it that would both be correct (depending which end you start at etc.) Meodipt (talk) 02:11, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Piperidilbenzilates

It would also be appropriate to add an article on Piperidil-Cyclopentylglycolates (Ditran, JB-329), as they belong into the same class and have been investigated as psychochemical warfare/subversion agents. See "S. Franke, Teaching book of military chemistry Vol 1, Military press of the German Democratic Republic, East Berlin, 1974". "S. Franke, Lehrbuch der Militaerchemie Bd 1, Militaerverlag der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik Ost-Berlin, 1974" They are more active than the benzilic acid compounds. 70.137.181.232 (talk) 11:21, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

I thought the increased activity compared to the benzilate, when you replace one phenyl by a cyclopentyl or thiophenyl, generally by making the c atom asymmetric, would be interesting for SAR aficionados. See ref above. Patched in the author. Interesting book. (very thick std teaching book of the military academy for military chemists) 70.137.181.232 (talk) 12:10, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

There have been earlier editions of the ref, reaching into the 60s, but I forgot the exact dates. (My background is already a bit dusty after all these years (cough)). Take care that you get the full edition in several volumes, not the dumbed down booklet one for general officers. Thats interesting reading. OT: If these books ever had an ISBN is questionable. All the valuable books I have learned from are not available any more. Not only the East German "Military Press", but also the "Academic Press" had good ones, which were not reprinted after the collapse, far as I know. Look at "Wilhelm Cauer, Theorie der linearen Wechselstromschaltungen" ("Theory of the linear AC circuits", with special coverage of the pulse steepening circuits in Hitler-Radar, but a very good theoretical teaching book by a hardcore mathematician) and "L.D. Landau, E.M. Lifshits, Theoretical Physics", to be read after reading the Feynman Lectures at Caltech as an introduction. :end OT So thank you for the additions. Did you also find something about thiophenyl derivatives? There is a quarternary ammonium base thiophenyl equivalent of QNB around as an asthma medicine, but has no central effect, because doesn't cross BB barrier. 70.137.181.232 (talk) 06:33, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Has the quinuclidine-cyclopentylglykolate/cyclohexylglykolate/thiophenylglykolate, thiophenyl-cyclopentylhydroxyacetate etc. etc. been described elsewhere? surprisingly, the psychotomimetic capacity seems not to be clearly related to antimuscarinic activity, due to details in receptor (subtype) binding and eventually other factors I guess. The hydroxy group is essential, as seen in antimuscarinics like trihexphenidyl etc, which are centrally acting anticholinergic on the muscarinic receptor but are not psychotomimetic (compared to e.g. JB329). The asymmetry of the C atom is a plus, I remember. If I remember correctly it would be possible to find compounds with high psychotomimetic activity but without noticeable peripheral anticholinergic action. This was actually the goal of some investigations, as a hot, dry, red appearance + mad as a hatter would be a dead giveaway. But without the peripheral action not. And a hard to differential diagnose syndrome, easily confused with a psychotic break, would be very suitable for subversion. See above ref. The secrets of the antimuscarinics would probably allow a more detailed coverage with high notability, including SARs etc. over the whole class, this would be highly interesting material. Has already been investigated well at EA and others, however I would have to dig for references. As I said, my memory is a little dusty (cough). Of course all my lay opinion. 70.137.181.232 (talk) 12:00, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

There are actually five subtypes of the muscarinic acetylcholine receptor, all of which have actions in the CNS but differing peripheral effects. As you say, there are some antimuscarinics like biperiden and trihexyphenidyl which produce relatively little peripheral side effects yet still have potent CNS actions, and presumably this reflects subtype selectivity although I'm not sure how closely this has been studied. I can't say I've researched the muscarinic receptors that much, most of the study I've done regarding cholinergic drugs has focused on the nicotinic receptors (which again have multiple subtypes), but one day I'm sure I will look into the muscarinic pathways in more detail! Meodipt (talk) 12:21, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the cyclopentyl analog of QNB. So you found that confirmed. How do you make the structure formula? I think I have to get a username to start new articles? Thank you for the links. I may say that the old eastern block materials were more detailed and educational. Including lab procedures. Fill a 5l 3-neck bottle blah blah mag stir blah blah, hold in reflux with toluene as a drafter (is that the correct translation for a secondary solvent used to distill off a reaction product as an azeotrope?) for 12 hrs blah blah activated charcoal box cooled with dry ice/acetone mix blah blah. Read it. A book for KHOMPETENT people. The dreaded amphetamine cooks today look just like Mother Theresa. The kids have no standards any more. Besides, it becomes more clear that the psychotomimetic vs. peripheral action is not the central theme. There is also a SAR tradeoff of central psychotomimetic vs other central anticholinergic (anti-parkinson etc.) action. I think I touched that already. Let me see if I can dig out more detailed materials. 70.137.181.232 (talk) 08:25, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

SVGs?

Hey, what happened? Your SVGs have suddenly become PNGs :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:19, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

No, it's not a problem. I was just surprised, that's all. Keep up the good work! Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:55, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

By the way, I removed Category:Serotonin receptor antagonists from your recently created 5-HT₃ antagonist articles because, well, it doesn't exist :) Seriously, Category:5-HT3 antagonists is already a subcategory of Category:Serotonin antagonists, so I think it's covered. Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:50, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Weaponized Cannabinoids

You are incredibly resourceful. I hadn't gotten a chance to read much into the compounds, just read an article a friend sent me on the tests. I don't actually have a computer of my own at the moment until the end of the month when I move into my grad school housing, but I'd love to help out where and when possible. Good luck on the exams! St3vo (talk) 03:31, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Ramoplanin

Hi again. Someone recently left a message at Ramoplanin and Image:Ramoplanin.png saying simply "the structure is horribly wrong"—and I'm afraid they were right! This is what the structure of ramoplanin looks like, it's a cyclic glycolipodepsipeptide. I've replaced the structure in the article with a new one; would you like to overwrite the PNG with a correct version or should I delete it? Best, Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:51, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh no feel free to delete the png if its incorrect. I just copied it verbatim from PubChem and I'm sure you are aware that the structures on there are sometimes unreliable! Strange that they got it so wrong though rather than just a bond or two out, I wonder if the structure on PubChem is the correct structure for a different antibiotic molecule entirely? Meodipt (talk) 22:41, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Deleted. I don't think that's a real compound—doesn't look like it, but I could be wrong :) I've long found PubChem unreliable; I use KEGG and the WHO's International Nonproprietary Name lists as structure sources now. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 02:11, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Also... I have granted rollback to your account which you may find helpful. (I can remove it if you don't want it.) -- Ed (Edgar181) 20:10, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Hypotaurine

Thanks for creating the image for Hypotaurine. I was about to do it and saw that it was already done.  :) -- Ed (Edgar181) 10:43, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi there, many thanks for the improvements to DaTSCAN, which I started up last year. I'm a medical physicist, not a pharmacologist, so your input is greatly appreciated! Jonnylaney (talk) 07:08, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Alkaloid

Thank you for the ref, does that cost something to load down? I will see. Hell, don't argue with cacycle or he will immediately determine that you have no clue and confuse everything, like salt formation with hydrolysis, and your refs are all arbitrary. See our discussion. I concede, I really have no clue, its all my lay opinion, I am only the electrician here, the eggheads are sitting next door. Red is blue, and plus is minus. Whats your opinion, offline? 70.137.143.23 (talk) 06:44, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

So my proposal to adhere to modern nomenclature and follow the systematics of the majority of books, historical nomenclature and recent scholarly papers is completely reasonable, not a sign of a lack of understanding on my side. The concept is a practical one, I want the reader to find things where he expects them, like in new and dated books and research. All too strict systematics have to stand back for that practical goal. (You know that I am thinking practical, the easten block literature, you know. Nothing too fancy, keep it prole.) 70.137.143.23 (talk) 08:22, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Cannabidiol

According to the DEA list CBD is not in scheduled: http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/schedules/alpha/alphabetical.htm
-- Panoramix303 (talk) 09:49, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi there. I was going off the list of scheduled substances on the Tocris website, and would consider them a reliable source seeing as they are the authorised suppliers for these compounds and are the ones who have to deal with the licensing requirements for supplying them. The "official" list on the DEA website is often out of date (note the bit at the top where it says This document is a general reference and not a comprehensive list), and the regulations with updated lists of what they do or do not consider illegal at any one time are not widely publicised. However if you wish to dispute this scheduling then change it back if you like, I can't really be bothered checking with either Tocris or the DEA for confirmation. Meodipt (talk) 09:53, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
The contradiction is strange, I'm aware of it for quite sometime. I have the impression that Tocris tends to schedule drugs in order to be on the safe side. Let's leave it like that. Just one tiny thing, the expression "zero abuse potential" is correct but not really wiki style. -- Panoramix303 (talk) 10:01, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Using WikiCleaner

Hello Meodipt!

I was just using the WikiCleaner to update the links, nothing more! I'm currently working on the Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links/Maintenance. I would highly recommend using WikiCleaner (or similar like AWB), again on the template, as it will save you a lot of time on matching the red-links and the good links to the correct page names. As you know, those page names change quite a bit! Here is the instruction page, if you hadn't run by it before: User:NicoV/Wikipedia Cleaner/Documentation. Thanks! Funandtrvl (talk) 14:22, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: lorcaserin

Thanks for joining in on editing the lorcaserin entry. I suspect that there's an investor engaging in an editing war with me, he/she keeps removing info and replacing it with the pharmaceutical company's press releases. I'm happy to have a 3rd person in the mix, and judging by the other pages you've edited and your credentials you will be a great asset. I hope you can find time to do more editing on that entry. Liturgie de cristal (talk) 23:50, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Meodipt, if you're ever bored,

There are a lot of chemical articles in the cocaine analogues series that can be made in Wikipedia with easily referenced off site information. I have noticed that you contributed to my 'List of cocaine analogues' page back in April and have also seen that you've made chemical images for pages. There haven't been many other contributors on the page or of such new chemical structure pages so I'd be flattered to see some help in this department, but only if you find such a thing worthy of your time (as I sometimes do in the right frame of mind knowing I'm contributing lasting articles to Wikipedia). Nagelfar (talk) 00:00, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I see your point from your response from my usertalk. Maybe we could however use the most 'pertinent' variant of each kind (maybe just help me re-draw the Tropoxane image for PD uses and you or I could make the article on that, seeing as that one "has it's own name"). Also a list could be made on the 'analogues list' page for many of those without necessarily giving them their own pages.

(As for the "Akashic records" user box, it doesn't have a code I put that in there from scratch, you've my permission to do the same ;-) ) Nagelfar (talk) 01:17, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you again so very much for your interest and ability to advance Wikipedia in the direction that you do for SARs of such substances. I did find this one article that very much piqued my interest and thought maybe it would be the same for you: "Isothiocyanate derivatives of cocaine: irreversible inhibition of ligand binding at the dopamine transporter" Apparently a class of covalent binding cocaine analogues that yet to have one such chemical as an example representing them on Wikipedia with its own article. Many regards, Nagelfar (talk) 16:58, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi - curious

Just being nosey. From your pharmacology background and interest in psychoactives, what do you hope to achieve with your JD? Turkeyphan^t 19:54, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Hopefully something in the pharmaceutical patent law area although I'm open to suggestions...Meodipt (talk) 21:59, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Opioid SAR question

I'm new to understanding opioid structure-activity relationships, and I'm having trouble finding a straight answer regarding the necessity of a free phenolic hydroxyl group for MOR binding of the phenanthrene opioids; the rule seems to be repeated in a lot of the literature, and it's consistent with the low affinity of heroin and codeine for mu relative to their more active metabolites. But do oxycodone and hydrocodone have to undergo 3-O-demethylation before they're active? Thanks! St3vo (talk) 17:53, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing things up - I'll definitely check those texts out if I can get my hands on them. St3vo (talk) 00:43, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Interesting chems

Thanks for improving Wiki with all the previously unheard-of compounds. I created the page for cyclopentamine, lefetamine, and more recently 2-methyl-2-butanol and UMB66. Care to help me revise them? Also I have some research papers on non-nitrogen containing analogues of cocaine that I think should be added. From: Grimelab —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grimelab (talk • contribs) 22:31, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for catching this. I can't believe I missed that, even while formatting the reference. -- Ed (Edgar181) 13:00, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Opioid template.

Maybe you could help me to take these one at a time, I mean if it is to be an accurate & exhaustive template. I think we should tackle if there are any ibogaine derivatives that have indeed been stripped of their mu or kappa affinity. The 18-MC article mentions, besides itself, ibogamine, 18-MAC, ME-18-MC, Voacangine, Noribogaine, Coronaridine in the list. I didn't want to be so bold with all of them, which is why I just added 18-MC: since it had in its article a mention of what affinities in relation to ibogaine it had been stripped of, and since the opioid ones were not mentioned I thought that was sufficient. Nagelfar (talk) 05:16, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

RS-102,221

Nice work, Meodipt. Very well referenced. - Richard Cavell (talk) 05:57, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Vaptans

What wonderful work you do! --Arcadian (talk) 03:34, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

And now, for Fvasconcellos' traditional nonsectarian holiday greeting!

Wherever you are, and whether you're celebrating something or not, there is always a reason to spread the holiday spirit! So, may you have a great day, and may all your wishes be fulfilled in 2009! Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:37, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Is this a combination of my Christmas greeting from 2006 and my New Year's greeting from last year? Why, it most certainly is! Hey, if it ain't broke...