Enantiomer used in a sentence

Enantiomer in a sentence as a noun

Then, when the first one expires they patent the same compound, but only the purified active enantiomer.

They just gave examples where the 2 enantiomers have different effects.

So a double strength dose of the racemic mixture has a much milder effect than a single strength dose of the strong enantiomer?

One enantiomer is a great morning sickness drug, the other causes catastrophic birth defects.

The patent system is often abused this way. First you sell the racemic mixture, then when that patent is about to expire, you start selling a new product that is just the active enantiomer.

> So a double strength dose of the racemic mixture has a much milder effect than a single strength dose of the strong enantiomer?Is that the angle here?

You would simply have to experience each enantiomer and the racemic mixture in order to understand what I am saying here.

I take Modafinil or its enantiomer Nuvigil sometimes to be smarter or compensate for lack of sleep.

It's an enantiomer, therefore literally half of what is in normal ketamine.

Both enantiomers are similarly active, and to me it's not 100% clear to me why Esketamine was the enantiomer chosen.

So, it's just enantiomerically pure S-ketamine - not really a new drug discovery.

> it's a enantiomer of ketamine, it's literally 50% of the molecules in ketamineI’m not a biologist or a chemist.

It's even more confusing: R-ketamine is the more effective enantiomer, with less dissociative effects.

It is being tested and it's not a "dangerous, untested new derivative", it's a enantiomer of ketamine, it's literally 50% of the molecules in ketamine.

It is possible to create a drug which has only the effective enantiomer; usually, a pure dose of the effective enantiomer will be effective at half the dose as the racemic mixture.

Similarly, esketamine would be the S-enantiomer of ketamine.

There are countless examples of these since our bodies' molecules naturally have "handedness".What you were essentially asking was would 100% of the "bad" enantiomer be significantly worse than a 50/50 mixture.

The reason Vyvanse has reportedly lower side-effects is because it lacks the less effective l-enantiomer, not because the amphetamine is otherwise radically different.

For example, I recall that I first came across the words 'chiral' and 'enantiomer' in textbooks well before I heard them being used by professionals who knew how to pronounce them correctly, again diacriticals would have quickly solved the problem.

Especially any time chiral things are involved, naturally-derived things are much more likely to be a pure enantiomer or close to it while artificial synthesis is more likely to produce racemates unless you are very careful.

Vyvanse contains a single enantiomer of a single amphetamine; Adderall contains two enantiomers each of two amphetamines, but if you know that, you probably already know everything else I'm clarifying here anyway.

Only one form of methamphetamine is psychologically active, the dextrotatory enantiomer.

If the racemic mixture is already being widely used, then the risk of the pure effective enantiomer is likely to be low, since it is basically just a more effective form of the already used drug, and the side effect profile should be similar to the existing drug.

Chemically, the manufacturing process is more complex, which adds to manufacturing costs; however, the main driver of additional costs is that you can get a new patent for the active enantiomer even after the patent on the racemic mixture is expired.

\nBiological systems often react differently to the different enantiomers of a chemical, sometimes being unresponsive to the enantiomer of a biologically active molecule, sometimes responding in a different but useful manner, and sometimes reacting adversely.