![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 8 of 8. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by ricker on September 2, 2008, at 12:48:00
I'm trying to understand the terminology? I'll give my definition in very simple terms and see how far off I am?
Inhibitor - prevents the cell from releasing chemical, therefore there is an increase in volume/production.
Antagonist - increases the rate at which the chemical "circulates", but does not cause an increase in volume?
You can plainly see I don't have sound knowledge as to medicinal propertries :-).
If someone would clarify, in "real simple" terms, the definitions. That is, unless I'm right! LOL.
Thanks, Rick
Posted by mav27 on September 2, 2008, at 13:35:19
In reply to Inhibitor vs Antagonist - definition?, posted by ricker on September 2, 2008, at 12:48:00
antagonists :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Receptor_antagonistit basically blocks the receptor so it doesnt recieve its signal from whatever chemical/transmitter
Posted by Larry Hoover on September 2, 2008, at 17:04:14
In reply to Inhibitor vs Antagonist - definition?, posted by ricker on September 2, 2008, at 12:48:00
> I'm trying to understand the terminology? I'll give my definition in very simple terms and see how far off I am?
>
> Inhibitor - prevents the cell from releasing chemical, therefore there is an increase in volume/production.The concept of inhibition is applied to enzyme activity. An enzyme facilitates some specific chemical reaction. An inhibitor slows or completely blocks that enzyme's processing capacity. Therefore there is an increase in reactant (the before-enzyme chemical structure), and a decrease in product (the results of the enzyme's actions) concentration. An example is the drug class MAOI, monoamine oxidase inhibitors, which block the deactivation of the neurotransmitters dopamine, norepinephrine, and serotonin (as well as other similar structures such as tyramine), keeping their concentrations higher than would otherwise be the case.
> Antagonist - increases the rate at which the chemical "circulates", but does not cause an increase in volume?
The concept of antagonism is generally applied to receptors and their normal stimulator chemicals (collectively, the receptor agonists). An antagonist is any substance that blocks the agonist from "turning on" the target receptor. The classic example is a chemical that fits into the receptor, blocking it, but which does nothing to stimulate the receptor. The agonist is still present, but it is prevented from doing anything.
> You can plainly see I don't have sound knowledge as to medicinal propertries :-).
>
> If someone would clarify, in "real simple" terms, the definitions. That is, unless I'm right! LOL.
>
> Thanks, RickIf there's anything I said that needs clarification, I'll do my best to make sense of it for you.
Lar
Posted by ricker on September 2, 2008, at 19:18:57
In reply to Re: Inhibitor vs Antagonist - definition? » ricker, posted by Larry Hoover on September 2, 2008, at 17:04:14
Posted by desolationrower on September 2, 2008, at 22:48:52
In reply to Thanks muchly for your informative replies. (nm), posted by ricker on September 2, 2008, at 19:18:57
Also, 'inhibitor' is commonly used in the phrase "reuptake inhibitor"
reuptake removes the neurotransmitter from the synapse (area between two neurons), which is where the receptors are. reuptake inhibitors block this.
-D/R
Posted by Larry Hoover on September 3, 2008, at 8:22:40
In reply to Re: Thanks muchly for your informative replies., posted by desolationrower on September 2, 2008, at 22:48:52
> Also, 'inhibitor' is commonly used in the phrase "reuptake inhibitor"
>
> reuptake removes the neurotransmitter from the synapse (area between two neurons), which is where the receptors are. reuptake inhibitors block this.
> -D/RDoh! Of course, that's true also. Totally forgot about that. It applies to transporters as well.
Lar
Posted by Larry Hoover on September 3, 2008, at 8:28:05
In reply to Inhibitor vs Antagonist - definition?, posted by ricker on September 2, 2008, at 12:48:00
> Inhibitor - prevents the cell from releasing chemical, therefore there is an increase in volume/production.
In the context of reuptake, an inhibitor of a neurotransmitter pump increases the exposure time of receptors in a synapse (the gap between neurons where receptors are most abundant). That can increase the magnitude of the effect of the neurotransmitter (amplifying it). That can have two consequences: a) enhanced immediate response; b) reduced long-term response. The latter can occur because of two mechanisms: a) down-regulation of downstream receptors because the signal was greater than the pre-existing average signal; b) down-regulation of neurotransmitter production via pre-synaptic receptor response.
The bottom line is things are very complicated, with all sorts of feed-back regulation. What effect will dominate, i.e. what we'll actually see happen, can differ substantially from what we hope to have happen.
Lar
Posted by ricker on September 3, 2008, at 16:15:07
In reply to Re: Thanks muchly for your informative replies., posted by desolationrower on September 2, 2008, at 22:48:52
Wow, I'm just beginning to understand... that I may never understand! It certainly makes one appreciate the incredible amount of education required inorder to explore possible theories.
It has also made me much more appreciative of this site. There are many members here, with an overwhelming amount of knowledge.
And the best part is, you all are willing to share it with us!Thank you all, for your time and effort.
Rick
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Medication | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.