Talk:Pseudoephedrine

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

March 2004

Can anyone get any info on possible hazards, symptoms of overdose, etc? Also it would be worth mentioning that pseudoephedrine can be dangerous to users of dextromethorphan as it is found in many brands of cough syrup that also contain DXM. DryGrain 20:55, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Is it appropriate to say paracetamol here? I am not sure what region this should be targeted to but the name used in the states is acetaminophen.

It is very appropriate to say paracetamol. Wikpedia is not exclusively a U.S. reference so the World Health Organization's International Nonproprietary Names (INN) should be used, and paracetamol is the INN. Acetaminophen is a USAN only, and only used in the United States (or anyone else who uses the USP) - the wikiarticle title is an anomaly. -Techelf 00:46, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The monograph reference seems to be broken

Misuse and illicit use questions

The wording here seems strange to me, in that it claims that some people use it for the stimulant effect but it probably doesn't work unless they are "sensitive" to it. As it is written, it appears to be supposition, but also the sentence itself appears to ultimately become a truism since wouldn't any drug only have effect on those sensitive to it?

All know is, that thanks to the government playing the blame game, sticking htier nose where it dosen't belong, & campaigning on the unwinnable war against drugs (one ingredient at a time) while there are more important things they could be doing, millions of serious allergy sufferers have to suffer even more, because they can only purchace one box every two weeks (at least in Washington State). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.161.122.193 (talk) 21:28, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the first part of your comment is well put; I must agree. The second half isn't really the type of discussion these pages are for, but since it's there I feel a response isn't out of the question: Pseudoephedrine is an ingredient in the clandestine manufacture of methamphetamine, but it is also somewhat dangerous by itself. Studies have linked it to heart problems and stroke (as you can see in the article), and the anxiety and potential for hallucinations (also mentioned in the article) make pseudoephedrine a rather "hard" drug by OTC standards. I personally won't touch the stuff; it always makes me feel psychologically unstable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.163.165.236 (talk) 01:10, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is more offtopic, but to the readers a few years ago I was constantly sick due to allergies combined with some nose problems -- the **only** thing that helped before my operation was pseudoephedrine. I'm glad I was able to use it before the governement had this useful chem banned. 220.244.10.16 (talk) 10:51, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Referred to by consumers as Sudafed?

That must be in North America, I suppose. Shouldn't we be more universal? I never heard such a name for pseudoephedrine before --164.77.84.202 16:47, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Changed it to be more universal. --Wirbelwind 17:37, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here in Oklahoma, for as long as I can remember, it's been quite common to call it Sudafed regardless of the actual brand name on the package. It's like referring to any nose-blowing paper as "Kleenex" or any cola as "Coke". But of course they reformulated name-brand Sudafed so it doesn't contain pseudoephedrine anymore, and thus the generic trademark isn't really appropriate now. Also it doesn't work as well. Grrr... Bouncey 17:25, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Phenylephrine?

The Sudafed http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudafed article already mentions the PE formulation, and it might be worth noting the possibility of the market moving toward Phenylephrine to avoid the misuse as a precursor for meth. I thougt about adding it but am not sure how to work it into the existing article structure.

I'd suggest adding a section to the end of the article stating precisely that. You might like to mention that the switch is a purely marketing- and politically-driven decision. Techelf 16:35, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Another thing worth mentioning with Sudafed "PE" is rebound congestion; after the drug wears off, your congestion is worse than when it began. This is not a problem with the pseudoephedrine version. Hurray for the war on drugs.
Only topical phenylephrine is associated with rebound congestion. Techelf 11:03, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Sudafed PE seems to not work for me. I am sorry if that is not relevant here, but I hope that any mention of Sudafed PE does not exagerate it's effectiveness. I think that the existing article about Pseudoephedrine is quite reasonable and therefore I am confident that any mention of Sudafed PE will also be reasonable.
Looking at the links on the Phenylephrine page, the British appear to have at least had a debate about this substitution, with some comments casting serious doubt on the effectiveness of Phenylephrine. This is mostly due to the extensive gut metabilism of the molecule, leaving virtually nothing left for systematic delivery. I found relief by doubling the directed dose. Of course, it was in a multi-symptom preparation which meant I also doubled the dosage of the other drugs as well, which is dangerous when acetaminophen is in the mix. I'm of the opinion that this is really a back-door market withdrawal in an attempt to avoid PPA-type class action litigation. Apparently Pseudoephedrine has been significantly linked to an increased risk of stroke. You sign up to buy it now so the pharmaceutical companies will have a solid record of who actually purchased it when the inevitable litigation arises. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.252.113.47 (talk) 18:24, 27 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Pseudoephedrine limitations

Is the U.S. state of Tennessee the only state with a law that limits the sale of pseudoephedrine? I live in Tennessee and would like to know if there are other such laws in other states. Maxistheman 18:08, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The law in Washington State has recently been changed to limit the sale [1] and possession [2] of pseudoephedrine. -- Jwinters | Talk 28 June 2005 16:26 (UTC)
In New South Wales, products containing pseudoephedrine are in Schedules 2 (Pharmacy Medicine), 3 (Pharmacist Only Medicine) and 4 (Prescription Only Medicine) depending on pack size, strength, and other active constituents. There is some push to make all pseudoephedrine-containing medicines Schedule 3 or 4 only - therefore requiring the intervention of a pharmacist in every sale. -Techelf 13:56, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
In Illinois, retailers are now required to keep not only basic pseudoephedrine behind the counter, but any drug containing pseudoephedrine - including gelcaps with other drugs (such as guaifenesin or dextromethorphan) - must be kept behind the counter, and buyers must sign a log that includes their address, as well as showing a government ID. [3] -Snoopy369 04:05, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Not only are the above states just a few of many localities that limit PSE, as of Sept. 31, 2006, controls will go in place across America, as part of a meth control act that was passed with the recent renewal of the Patriot Act. Sales can only be made at a pharmacy counter, you must have federal ID, must sign a log, and are limited to (IIRC) 3.6 grams a day, 9 grams a month of PSE, ephedrine, and phenylpropanolamine (if that's even available in anything any more). Stricter local laws will override this, of course. Student Driver 16:01, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The restrictions in NSW referred to above are now in force - all pseudoephedrine-containing products are classified schedule 3 or 4, and details of every purchase must be recorded. I've added the detail to the article. Phil500 10:03, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article is lacking detail on individual state restrictions within the US. Could we incorporate more detailed information on each state that has additional restrictions on pseudoephedrine? Also, isn't there a national database for tracking purchases across the US now? Bluethegrappler (talk) 01:48, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Questions?

The following were placed in the main article by 24.82.186.72

How is Pseudoephedrine made ? is it made ? How is it different from the Ephedrine, I support the Paseudo version is not from the plant,... then from what ? How different would be the Methamphetamine created from those two ? Does the end product will be the exact same ? What would be the official way of creating Methamphetamine ? I mean, the chemistry way, without *ephedrine, the way people can not do themself at home. How different this Methamphetamine would be ?

I added a section titled "Manufacture" to the article. Essentially, pseudoephedrine occurs naturally along with other ephedrine-related compounds in certain plants. However, the pseudoephedrine found in most pharmaceutical products is not derived from plant matter, but instead is produced by yeast fermentation of dextrose in the presence of the enzyme pyruvate decarboxylase.

As for methamphetamine, I believe this is produced commercially (see Desoxyn, for example) by very similar methods to at least one of the illicit production methods: ephedrine or pseudoephedrine is used as a precursor, which is then reduced and catalytically hydrogenated using raney nickel and gaseous hydrogen, perhaps. As for the result, there is theoretically no difference between methamphetamine produced in this manner and methamphetamine produced illicitly; in practice, however, most "street meth" likely is less refined than commercially produced batches, and may contain contaminants such as unreacted precursors, lingering intermediates (such as iodomethamphetamine, for example), and the like. While there are ways to produce methamphetamine without using ephedrine, it would be my guess that commercial pharmaceutical manufacturers nonetheless probably do use ephedrine as a precursor, given its very low cost in bulk. —Ryanaxp 15:42, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Brand names redirecting here?

Some of the brand names listed at the end redirect to this page (like Contact, which I was actually trying to look up for its early use of time-release capsules). Seems inaccurate to me. Outside of Sudafed and the like, it's a bit imprecise to list things like Contac or Actifed as being PSE-based; some have been (or will be) reformulated to not contain PSE, and the trade names (unlike Sudafed) don't refer specifically to pseudoephedrine-- Contac is a trade name for cold medicines in general, Actifed for triprolidine/decongestant mixture, etc. Student Driver 16:06, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Sad that it's been like this for over 5 years. I just wanted to settle a debate on how Contac was different from Theraflu. We're better than this wikipedians! Ngmcs8203 (talk) 21:52, 3 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Appetite suppressant?

Does anyone know anything about the effect of pseudoephedrine on appetite? A Google search turns up a good number of articles investigating this and even arguing for the use of PSE to suppress appetite. However, I don't have the expertise to evaluate them. I just got curious because every time I take PSE for sinusitis etc., I can barely eat anything & was wondering if that's peculiar to me or a common side effect. Possible off-label use, misuse, or--? PoetrixViridis 01:36, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah it stops you being hungry. Same as Meth or Speed.

Tried it for that effect, no use, even in very high dosage. Your mileage may vary, as they say. Miacek (talk) 22:28, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality

"- Top Care brand mfg. by Topco" doesn't sound very neutral to me —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.228.104.147 (talk) 22:01, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling / Usage Suggestions + Questions

Under 'Chemistry,' the article states "does not reduce to D-methamphetamine (which is the enatiomer used as a recreational drug), and..." Make that enantiomer.

Also under 'Chemistry,' the article reads "L-Pseudoephedrine ... has fewer side-effects, fewer central nervous system (CNS) stimulatory effects, does not reduce to D-methamphetamine ... and yet it retains its efficacy as a decongestant. However, the patent holder for L-pseudoephedrine (Pfizer/Warner-Lambert) has not yet sought or received government approval for its sale to the public."

The key thought here is that it's just as effective, but can't be used as a precursor to methamphetamine. That certainly catches people's attention. And because interest in this topic is high (since many find pseudoephedrine very effective and phenylephrine a total dud), the first thought is "Great - let's have it!". So the immediate question occurs in the reader's mind "Why not?" when (s)he reads that Phizer / Warner - Lambert "have not yet sought..." (after knowing now for several years that the existing enantiomer would be restricted). Does the author feel it is 'out of scope' to comment on this point - illumination of which would be of high interest? Has Phizer issued any comments (such as "We're working on it" or...)?

Under "Mode of action," the article states "The displaced noradrenaline is released into the neuronal synapse where it is free to activate the aforementioned postsynaptic adrenergic receptors." Since 'postsynaptic' is already implicit in the notion of 'adrenergic receptor,' perhaps 'postsynaptic' is superfluous / redundant / confusing to those not well versed in such details, and should be eliminated. To leave the wording as written gives the impression (since 'postsynaptic' adrenergic receptors are mentioned) - that there must also be 'presynaptic' adrenergic receptors.

Under "United States federal law" the article states "The Federal statute included the following requirements for merchants ("regulated seller") who sell these products:

- Required verification of proof of identity of all purchasers

- 30 day (not monthly) sales limit not to exceed 7.5 grams if sold by mail-order ...

It may be so (that this is the way the statute reads), but isn't there something jarring about seeing "proof of identity" juxtaposed with "sold by mail order"? How can a mail order sale be compatible with "proof of identity"?

Not the author's issue, but side comment on classic bureaucratic gobbledygook: "verification of proof of..." (cringe).

Also, should 'for merchants ("regulated seller")' read 'for merchants ("regulated sellers)?

In all other ways I found the article very informative / helpful - thanks!

Steve Ferris

SDFerris@PatMedia.net

24.149.176.158 (talk) 14:35, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's been a while since the above was posted and this is an expression of opinion rather than a reflection of 'verifiable source,' but anent the issues of 'proof of identity' and 'sold by mail order,' my understanding (or assumption) is that proof in the form of a valid photo ID is a requirement for on-site sales at pharmacies; for a mail order, the information on a signed check, credit card number or similar method of payment is considered sufficient proof. Of course, if people were to start mail-ordering pseudoephredrine by stuffing cash in an envelope and requesting quantities be sent to 'John Doe at P.O. Box etc,' the Federal laws might be amended, but mail-order sellers don't like getting envelopes stuffed with cash.

--JWMcCalvin (talk) 08:12, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of brand names

I have removed the list of brand names, as it seems to be unencyclopedic and doesn't fit in a Wikipedia article. --DaniAmaranth (talk) 02:17, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not going to rewind 13 years to see what you removed, and I'm certainly not going to undo it. However, this is not necessarily out of scope for Wikipedia's mission. This is an almanac as well as an encyclopedia, and with proper citations and meeting other criteria such as notability, a list of products that contained a specific drug (especially with dates that they dropped it either completely or replaced it with phenylephrine) might actually be a candidate for its own article on Wikipedia. Someone else can write it, and the field has likely evolved in the past 13 years. 209.94.144.13 (talk) 05:14, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What does this mean?

In the "Misuse and illicit use -> United Kingdom section", we're told that Sudafed "has only ever been available on prescription or over the counter". Doesn't seem to leave much! 86.132.138.159 (talk) 01:20, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Even if it means from behind the counter and not on shelves, that isn't true. Until a few years ago it was always available right off of the shelf in chemists. 82.4.47.118 (talk) 20:03, 8 March 2009 (UTC)gr[reply]

sinus caplets perrigo acetaminophen pseudoephedrine

sinus caplets perrigo acetaminophen pseudoephedrine —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.4.97.195 (talk) 15:29, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative and illicit use

"Many retailers such as Target, Wal-Mart, CVS, and Winn-Dixie have created corporate policies restricting the sale of pseudoephedrine-containing products. Their policies restrict sales by limiting purchase quantities and requiring a minimum age with proper identification."[[4]]

"requiring a minimum age with proper identification."

I'm sure all these 1-17 year-old kids are trying to reduce pseudoephedrine in hopes of synthesizing methamphetamine (after they've already obtained some phosphorous and whipped up some highly corrosve hydroiodic acid...)[end sarcasm]

1. Proper identification? I wonder... Do they decide whether or not to sell to a customer based on the "Does This Guy Look Like a Methamphetamine Chemist" chart?

2. Logically, the reduction of pseudoephedrine to methamphetamine is a relatively complex and potentially deadly process. Restricting the sale of pseudoephedrine to those who are 18+ wouldn't make the slightest impact on methamphetamine production or distribution. Unless, of course, it is customary for meth labs to send kids to buy precursors for them? If it's a health issue, the adverse effects of drinking 2 Jolt Cola (560mg caffeine) are MUCH more severe than that of pseudoephedrine use.[1][2] <~ Compare the 2 if you wish.

I vote in favor of some note being added after this little fact in the article about Target, Wal-Mart, CVS, and Winn-Dixie (and how they try to appease the government by adding seemingly purposeless and irrelevant sales restrictions). I know it isn't very "encyclopedic" of me, but I must LOL @ the fail attempt by these stores.

This shouldn't necessarily be removed from the article, but I honestly don't see how these actions effect meth production... --T3hZ10n (talk) 09:51, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno if we should really add your comment, seeing as the entire thing is uncited. Making something up, then taking is as true, and getting indignant about the thing you made up - kinda weird. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.111.202.103 (talk) 11:53, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I like that you have two citations in a Talk page. I also don't really follow what you want changed about the article, it seems you have a complaints for Walmart and other stores. My personal belief (which I will not add to the article, because it is an opinion and that's even worse than original research, and this is not a politics article) is that the ID policies for pseudoephedrine are not for increasing safety but actually a form of "Anti-Illegal Drugs Theater" similar to the idea of Security Theater at airports. There are legitimate and effective steps being taken to increase safety at airports and to prevent methamphetamine manufacture, but they are not very visible to the public and thus not "calming", so you hassle people a little bit to reassure them. 209.94.144.13 (talk) 05:08, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoephedrine#Adverse_effects
  2. ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caffeine#Caffeine_intoxication

New Zealand

Use of a form of illicit Methamphetamine, intended for smoking, locally known as "P", has currently reached plague proportions within New Zealand. Members of our political elite are now openly using this drug; the result being, programmes intended to reduce the "P" trade are presently prosecuted with a notable lack of resolve. Our elite appear to be putting themselves under obligation to criminal elements.

Without exaggeration the future of this country is imperilled. "P" has caused New Zealand to lose its way recently. Unofficial visits from overseas authorities have put our leadership on notice. Because of the status of some users of this drug, the situation currently continues unchanged.

New Zealand leaders do not seem to realise the consequences of their continued use of this highly illegal drug. This was a great little country, because of Methamphetamine our future may be bleak. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.92.156.152 (talk) 22:45, 10 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pseudoephedrine - on the WADA prohibited list for 2010

Can't get in the article to change this, can someone please update this section to read that Pseudoephedrine is prohibited above 150 micrograms per millilitre from 1 January 2010.

Reference: http://www.wada-ama.org/en/newsarticle.ch2?articleId=3115854

Pseudoephedrine as a treatment for ADHD

I found it interesting that someone mentioned that Pseudoephedrine has been used by some as treatment for ADHD. I have taken Pseudoephedrine many times to treat cold symptoms. Whenever I take it, I have noticed that my ability to focus, concentrate and think is improved substantially. I would like to see the citations for the statement made just to satisfy my own curiosity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Onevim (talk • contribs) 20:34, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Chemical formula

Pretty sure it should be NH instead of just N

Goozay 28 October 09 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Goozay (talk • contribs) 17:11, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I replaced the image with a better one. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:56, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New Zealand - Data is incorrect.

Prime Minister John Key _announced_ that he was going to make pseudoephedrine a more restricted drug, but this has not happened yet. The link used in the article to support this goes to a page decribing how pseudoephedrine has been seized, but nothing about classifications of the drug.

This page shows that the drug is currently still a C3 drug (you need ID to purchase, no prescription necessary), not a "2B" drug (a non-existent classification - B2 is the correct one)

This govt legislation page shows that the legislation to change this has not been put through yet, but is still in process. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.20.3.22 (talk) 05:09, 24 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What about Alaska?

What are the regulations for that state ? 67.187.157.198 (talk) 01:02, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Historical information is missing

This article says nothing about the history of the chemical's discovery and medicinal use. I wanted to learn how long people had been using pseudoephedrine(since the 1950s? 1850s? 20s?) and when was it first created (or discovred)? by who? Y'know, some interesting trivia or background information. Very dissappointed that an encyclopedia article about a common modern household product wouldn't give any historical information other than recent regulatory classification. I would think the production process of fermentating dextrose w/ benzaldehyde would have been invented by SOMEBODY. Or has mankind been producing and using this stuff since the dawn of civilization? I'm sure some of the people who contributed to this Wiki page must know the answers to these (reasonable I think) qeustionsQdiderot (talk) 06:13, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is always improving, and you're welcome to help us improve it. Perhaps you could do some library and on-line research into the history and add what you learn to the article? --Macrakis (talk) 14:13, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good idea, and I've tried to do as suggested. A cursory online patent search showed a reference to pseudoephedrine in a 1964 patent application for a pill composition, but I haven't yet had luck in finding out precisely when pseudoephedrine as decongestant made its debut. It's harder to find this info than I had thought. Qdiderot (talk) 22:22, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It was apparently known as a decongestant by 1928 [5]. This 1926 article seems to have the relevant information on ephedrine and pseudoephedrine, but unfortunately I don't have access to this article, though the first page has the basic historical information -- you may want to take a look. --Macrakis (talk) 01:24, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nifty, thank you for posting those links. It's a shame that they charge for access to the full article. Qdiderot (talk) 07:02, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Precautions and contraindications

I removed the last part of the section, which was:

The in vitro addition of pseudoephedrine to sera containing the cardiac iso-enzyme MB of serum creatine phosphokinase progressively inhibits the activity of the enzyme. The inhibition becomes complete over 6 hours.[citation needed]

Don't know what it means, and more importantly, I can't see how it would qualify as a contraindication. Maybe it belongs in another section? DS Belgium (talk) 09:11, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What's the difference?

Oxymetazoline and Ephedrine are the same decongestants due to activation of the α1 adrenergic receptors. Does it really matter to determine which sort of medication for sinus and colds are better? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 00AgentBond93 (talk • contribs) 21:17, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All products containing pseudoephedrine are now considered a Schedule III drug in Mississippi

Effective July 1, 2010, all products that contain pseudoephedrine in Mississippi are now a Schedule III drug.

The law can be seen here: http://billstatus.ls.state.ms.us/documents/2010/html/HB/0500-0599/HB0512SG.htm

I work for a company that has to deal with sending prescriptions to Mississippi, and they confirmed that this meant that OTC and Prescription medications are affected.

An excerpt:

MISSISSIPPI LEGISLATURE 2010 Regular Session To: Judiciary A By: Representatives Blackmon, Holland, Chism House Bill 512 (As Sent to Governor) AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION 41-29-117, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO INCLUDE EPHEDRINE AND PSEUDOEPHEDRINE AS A SCHEDULE III CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE; TO AMEND SECTIONS 41-29-313 AND 41-29-317, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, TO CONFORM; TO REPEAL SECTION 41-29-315, MISSISSIPPI CODE OF 1972, WHICH RESTRICTS THE OVER-THE-COUNTER PURCHASE AND SALE OF EPHEDRINE AND PSEUDOEPHEDRINE; TO EXEMPT LICENSED WHOLESALE DRUG DISTRIBUTORS FROM CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS UNDER THIS ACT; AND FOR RELATED PURPOSES.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI:
SECTION 1. Section 41-29-117, Mississippi Code of 1972, is amended as follows:
41-29-117. (A) The controlled substances listed in this section are included in Schedule III.

SCHEDULE III

(e) Any material, compound, mixture or preparation which contains any quantity of ephedrine or pseudoephedrine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Garylian (talk • contribs) 15:54, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Law regarding Washington State

Source #42 is concerning a town called Washington, Missouri, and is not actually Washington state.

Is there evidence for an ergogenic effect from pseudoephedrine?

There is a section dedicated to the use of pseudoephedrine in sport, but is there any evidence that it has an actual ergogenic effect? What is the rationale for banning it in athletics? Bluethegrappler (talk) 01:55, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It likely is not ergogenic, at least not potently. Caffeine is of course quite efficacious, even at "normal doses" of 100 mg to 600 mg in healthy adults. Caffeine is probably not ergogenic via being a stimulant, it probably relates to excitation-contraction coupling in skeletal muscle, and it significantly prolongs time to exhaustion during aerobic exercise. Pseudoephedrine is simply a stimulant, and it is centrally-acting in large part. I have mixed feelings about anti-doping rules in sport, but banning pseudoephedrine probably relates to the fact that it is dangerous to take lots of pseudoephedrine and then run a marathon. You might have a stroke due to hypertension, for instance. Will the pseudoephedrine allow your skeletal muscles do perform more mechanical work? Maybe not. Caffeine does that, and caffeine is significantly less toxic. Preventing hemorrhagic strokes is more important than preventing "cheating" in my personal opinion, especially if the cheating isn't helpful. The fact that professional athletes have died of ephedrine overdose seems like a justifiable reason to ban pseudoephedrine, it doesn't really matter whether the drug is actually ergogenic. If it is not medically necessary, then why is the athlete taking medication? 209.94.144.13 (talk) 13:04, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Zephrex-D

Zephrex-D should be mentioned in the article somewhere, a special form of pseudopehdrine that is very difficult and expensive to convert to meth (about $200 per dose, which is many times the street value of meth)

Contraindications and Precautions

Hello. I added in a new 2016 Cochrane reference, and a small sentence re use in children. I am new to wikipedia editing and I am open and appreciate feedback and advice. Thanks. JenOttawa (talk) 20:28, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Incomplete edit summary

Managed to strike Enter accidentally while going for the apostrophe. Edit summary for this change should be:

Claim about rebound congestion has remained uncited since I tagged it in May 2016; removed. Removed adverse effects unsupported by the provided references.

Amlz (talk) 07:54, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(1S, 2S)-(+)-pseudoephedrine is common now, but the racemic mixture was once common

The main picture shows (1S, 2S)-(+)-pseudoephedrine (currently on 2020-02-22), and it even has "(S)" on each of the chiral centers in the image files. That is fine in my opinion, this enantiomer is most common in 2020 in synthetic contexts.

However, the main picture doesn't have a caption, and the (1R, 2R) enantiomer does occur in nature (in plants), and it has been the subject of almost as much research as the dextrorotary isomer. This is because ephedrine and pseudoephedrine are super old - they were originally obtained from plants, and researchers may not have known the biosynthesis is usually stereospecific, and the laboratory synthesis gave a racemic product when they did the initial pharmacodynamics studies.

Receptor affinities for pseudoephedrine and norpseudoephedrine are often hard to find because enantiopure drugs were not easily available in the 1960s and 1970s, when they were inventing anti-adrenergic blood pressure medications and trying to find "less dangerous versions of cocaine", resulting in things like prazosin and bupropion.

Starting in the 1980s or earlier, the industrial-scale synthesis of pseudoephedrine (for use as a decongestant) has produced (1S, 2S)-pseudoephedrine, which is (+)-pseudoephedrine in terms of optical activity. The carbon numbered "2", with the methylamino substituent, has the same configuration as S-(+)-amphetamine (dextroamphetamine, Dexedrine, Vyvanse) and S-(+)-methamphetamine (marketed in the US as Desoxyn).

If you search research for keywords like "alpha-adrenergic" and "beta-adrenergic", you are likely to find that "the other enantiomer of pseudoephedrine" is extremely relevant to science. It may be hard to synthesize or obtain in this millennium, but the data often has both enantiomers, because of what was available at the time.

I actually don't know how they synthesize pseudoephedrine currently - the stereospecificity of the product makes me suspect they use yeast or bacteria. I doubt they are doing a solvent extraction on Ephedra leaves, although that was the original method. 209.94.144.13 (talk) 12:52, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Too much detail

In the Legal status section pertaining to the US there is a mass of detail, much of which is not relevant to an encyclopedia article. For example, all that guff about what sort of identification is required to purchase it should be removed. Any objections to stripping out some of the material? Arcturus (talk) 11:12, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Pseudoephedra" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Pseudoephedra and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 25 § Pseudoephedra until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Hemiauchenia (talk) 22:22, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Pseudoephedrine"