paul@phs.UUCP (02/23/84)
<> Re: thalidomide: I dimly recall seeing a PBS-type show on biological clocks (circadian rhythms) about 8 years ago, in which it was claimed that the thalidomide problem was in fact due to a difference between rats and humans that might seem trivial: Namely, that rats are active at night and humans in the day. Supposedly, the German company which made thalidomide tested it on rats with the doses given in the morning, at the beginning of their rest cycle; virtually all pups were born normal. However, after the thalidomide tragedy, someone thought up the idea of giving the drug at night, at the beginning of their active cycle; the pups were then born with similar disfigurements to the human case. Unfortunately, humans took thalidomide before or during their active cycle, hence (perhaps) the problem. However, I have never seen this in print, nor have I ever met anyone who has heard of this. Anyone out there have a better memory, or who has read of this? Reply by mail if you like, but I would suspect the answer would be of wide interest. --------------------------------------------- Paul Dolber @ Duke U Med Ctr (...!duke!phs!paul)
scw@cepu.UUCP (02/27/84)
I was under the impression that the problem arose because of the very
narrow time frame in which it could cause the deformations (about 1
week in humans) given the ratio of almost 6 to one in gestation time
(and a possible variation in the width of the window of vunerability
<where have I heard that expression before?>) it could be that the
tests never happened to have exactly the right dosage to cause the
problems in rats. Add the activity variable and it starts to show how
this could be missed.
--
Stephen C. Woods (VA Wadsworth Med Ctr./UCLA Dept. of Neurology)
uucp: { {ihnp4, uiucdcs}!bradley, hao, trwrb, sdcsvax!bmcg}!cepu!scw
ARPA: cepu!scw@ucla-locus
location: N 34 06'37" W 118 25'43"