Posted by Larry Hoover on June 14, 2003, at 18:44:37
In reply to LARRY: where did you learn/read that stuff?, more: » Larry Hoover, posted by Janelle on June 14, 2003, at 16:49:39
> Where on earth did you read/learn that great and easy to follow analogy with the gloves and where did you learn/read about chiralty, and s- and r- eantiomers? This is so impressive, I would just love to know where this info is available (on the net?) because my apparently lame-o search did not turn up anything remotely like these great explanations!
I'm glad my explanation was useful for you. I'm sure I drew on things I've read elsewhere, but the explanation was one I wrote just for you. Another reason the glove analogy is a good one is that you can't put your right hand in a left glove, even if you know it's from a pair that fits you. Picturing these sorts of fitting in and not fitting in go a long way to understanding chirality of molecules.
I'm trained in organic chemistry, and I can picture molecules in three dimensions in my brain. It just makes sense to me. What can I say?
> However, I do have one question - you said that when you shake hands with someone, you both hold out your right hands but that a left hand doesn't fit a right hand during a hand-shake, even though it has all the parts arranged in a similar way, just arranged with the opposite orientation.
>
> Well, actually when I shake hands with someone my left hand fits perfectly though oppositely with their right hand and vice versa!I'm not sure I understand that. When I shake hands, it's right hand to right hand. Except when I was in Boy Scouts, it was left to left.
> Is the r-enantiomer the RIGHT side one and the s-enantiomers the LEFT one? I'm just curious since "r" is the first letter for the "R"ight side? True?
It's from the Latin, rectus for right, sinister for left. The way that it is right or left is perhaps more complicated than I want to get into here, as it doesn't help the understanding any.
> So, it sounds like they removed the WEAKER of the two enantiomers from Celexa and kept it IN Lexapro, because Lexapro has a LOWER dosing level than Celexa (though not by a whole lot!) Is this correct?That's what they're saying. They've removed the r-enantiomer, blaming it for more side-effects, and little contribution to the antidepressant effect.
> Thanks a million for your info. It clarified the whole thing about the enantiomers at least!
I'm glad.
Lar
poster:Larry Hoover
thread:233801
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20030614/msgs/234020.html