Hmmm......then you are going to have to examine the papers closely, and see
which one you are going to believe (can't help you here, I'm just a whole
animal behavior/behavioral pharmacology kinda guy). A former colleague of
mine used to complain about a lot of the data from binding and
autoradiography etc. saying that many people did not understand what they
were doing and so were terribly prone to accident. He called them "kit
"BilZ0r" <BilZ0r at TAKETHISOUThotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xns94956C4FD5BB5BilZ0rhotmailcom at 18.104.22.168...
> Reuptake transporter = Reuptake carrier, and Although I've never heard it
> before, presumabley they are all the same as the reuptake receptor.
>> What I am after is a single experiment that quantifies, either in terms
> of EC50s, or Ki/d/m (whatever) the affinity for those various
> amphetamines for the 5-HT reuptake transporter/carrier/receptor and the
> dopamine transporter/carrier/receptor. The reason why Im after the
> affinities in one paper, is that I find wildely varying affinities from
> one paper to the next.
>> David Longley <David at longley.demon.co.uk> wrote in news:99WQuKIuR
> $MAFwOg at longley.demon.co.uk:
>> > I once worked with DSP-4 (N-2-chloroethyl-N-ethyl-2-bromobenzylamine
> > hydrochloride) as an alternative to 6-OHDA) whilst looking at forebrain
> > NE' (and other monomaines') role in various aspects of learning. It
> > looks like the term "transporter" is being used here as a synonym for
> > (presynaptic) "reuptake receptor". Is that the case? I used to use DMI,
> > 5-7 DHT, but not MDMA in control groups. I thought these ligands were
> > somewhat dirty and bound to lots of receptors - is this what you're
> > interested in, ie their relative affinities (sorry if this has all been
> > said earlier).
> > This is really a trivial question for my benefit, as I expect matters
> > have moved on considerably since my day (although I do try to keep up
> > with some of it).