Brian,
You wrote in part:
>but why should I miss all the fun to be had, speculating in a vacuum?
It is interesting that you describe the Ernie-Dennis-Ida speculation as
being in a vacuum. In fact it was a discussion of the implications of
a statement made to Ernie by the manufacturers of Sinemet. Despite
your comments on there being figures that dispute the statement made
by Lilly (I presume), they can hardly be dismissed as a vacuum.
With regard to your point about blood plasma and the blood/brain barrier.
As none of us at this time knows exactly what is happening beyond the
blood brain barrier it is difficult to know how to speculate (and a theory
is also a speculation) without including blood plasma readings.
You further stated:
>The trick to avoiding endless
> speculation about intermediate stages is simply to jump right over them.
> Don't you agree?
No.
This contention of yours worries me a bit. Its like saying 'never mind the
words, just sing the song'. As one dose runs into another, as agonists and
selegiline add their contributions it is difficult to see what you are
calling
a full stage. Where in real terms are the cut-off points, why have those
particular points been chosen. It seems to me that to ignore the clutter is
to ignore the problem. I appreciate that this makes the answers harder to
come by, but if there were easy answers, they would have been found
already.
Dennis.
++++++++++++++++++++
Dennis Greene 47/10
[log in to unmask]
++++++++++++++++++++
PS How it began, if anyone is really interested.
Ernie wrote:
>I telephoned the manufacturers of Sinemet on this point and also because
>they had not sent me the data I had requested from them before Christmas.
>Seeking clarification on the "half-life", I was told that the "exponential
>decay rate" referred to the drug once it was in the blood plasma.
In response to this information from the drugs manufacturer, whom
it might be presumed have some small knowledge of their product, I,in turn,
wrote:
>With regard to Sinemet CR, it seems to me that the implication of the
>statement that ' the "exponential decay rate" referred to the drug once
>it was in the blood plasma' is that:
followed by my conclussions.
