Thank you for this video sir. This gave me an a very intuitive way to think about/visualize why drug dosing follows a 2nd order hill shaped response rate (beyond the math that leads there), in that if you give a little, it will get soaked up and do nothing, if you give a medium amount, it will bind more and more of the target, and then it will saturate both the target and the sponge proteins such as albumin. I had been thinking that a critical mass of drug target receptors would be needed before you get an effect, and that's what the cause was, but this is probably the bigger reason. I bet that is still true as well though (case dependent maybe). So why don't we, or do we, give patients a drug that does nothing other than get bound by albumin, prior to giving the real drug, thereby allowing greater efficacy at lower doses and thereby providing less toxicity (assuming the albumin drug is safer than the receptor drug)? Less chance of side effects, lower cost of drug because each patient needs less. Or did I just stumble on a conspiracy?
That just wouldn't work, becouse the free fraction is responsible for the toxic effects as well, not the protein bound. Also you would marginally increase the clearence of the drug, reducing its half life..
Great video! Thanks! Question: If a blood thinner must be stopped to proceed with the surgery safely, would the solution be to increase the dosage of the seizure medication temporarily to over-saturate the binding sites and make the medication effective in preventing seizures?
Okay, I don't understand what the "bound in protein %" is used for then? For example... 70 percent of Lidocaine is bound in human blood. Does that mean only 70 percent will bind to the proteins? Doesn't that leave more proteins open for binding?
Thank you for what you do. Your explanation was clear and to the point! God bless
FANTASTIC explanation!!!!
Thank you!! after lots of reading, this has finally sunk in with your very clear explanation. thank you!! Thank you!!
Thank you so much for being so simple yet precise in your explanation.
great explanation!!! loved the visuals, and straight to the point!
Thank you for this video sir.
This gave me an a very intuitive way to think about/visualize why drug dosing follows a 2nd order hill shaped response rate (beyond the math that leads there), in that if you give a little, it will get soaked up and do nothing, if you give a medium amount, it will bind more and more of the target, and then it will saturate both the target and the sponge proteins such as albumin.
I had been thinking that a critical mass of drug target receptors would be needed before you get an effect, and that's what the cause was, but this is probably the bigger reason. I bet that is still true as well though (case dependent maybe).
So why don't we, or do we, give patients a drug that does nothing other than get bound by albumin, prior to giving the real drug, thereby allowing greater efficacy at lower doses and thereby providing less toxicity (assuming the albumin drug is safer than the receptor drug)? Less chance of side effects, lower cost of drug because each patient needs less. Or did I just stumble on a conspiracy?
That just wouldn't work, becouse the free fraction is responsible for the toxic effects as well, not the protein bound. Also you would marginally increase the clearence of the drug, reducing its half life..
Great explanation. Thank you
thank you so much . keep posting new concept of pharmacology particularly pharmacodynamic of drugs,please.
AHHH MAKE SO MUCH SENSE NOW!! THANK YOUUU!
Great video! Thanks! Question: If a blood thinner must be stopped to proceed with the surgery safely, would the solution be to increase the dosage of the seizure medication temporarily to over-saturate the binding sites and make the medication effective in preventing seizures?
lifesaving video series
Perfect explanation
still useful today for pharmacology, thanks a lot
thank you sir . we need more video like this
Thank you for this :-)
Thanks it has just given me the easy clear answer to my query :D
AMAZING
Okay, I don't understand what the "bound in protein %" is used for then? For example... 70 percent of Lidocaine is bound in human blood. Does that mean only 70 percent will bind to the proteins? Doesn't that leave more proteins open for binding?
Thank you!!!
this video helped me alot
make so much sense now
Thank you so much!
Thank you so much! I have a better understanding :)
Thank you☺
thank you !!!! this helped me alot
thank you sir . we need more video like this
thank you sir . we need more video like this