Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T07:09:58.840Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Factors Involved in Drug-Produced Model Psychoses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 February 2018

Roland Fischer
Roland Fischer*
Affiliation:
Psychiatric Research Unit, Department of Public Health General Hospital, Munroe Wing Research Laboratory Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The use of fibrous wool protein as a model of the structural surface of receptors, possibly involved in the mechanism producing a model psychosis by drugs, was suggested by three lines of evidence.

First, the strong affinity (sorption) of certain basic compounds to keratins of low sulphur content as exemplified by the Gram-positiveness of epidermal (Fischer, 1953c) and nervous (Bailey, 1950) tissue.

Second, the accumulating evidence indicating the similarity in behaviour between keratins of high sulphur content (e.g. wool) and the protein component of certain cell membranes (Fischer, 1951; Fischer and Larose, l952a; idem, 1952b; Larose and Fischer, 1952; idem, l953a and 1953b).

Third, some preliminary experiments confirming the role of wool protein as a useful model to simulate some of those receptors for which certain drugs appear to compete.

Type
Original Articles
Information
Journal of Mental Science , Volume 100 , Issue 420 , July 1954 , pp. 623 - 631
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 1954 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bailey, P., Rev. Neurol., 1950, 82, 1.Google Scholar
Benitte, A., Paper presented in Bonn at the 20th Meeting of German Pharmacologists, 4–7 October, 1953.Google Scholar
Behringer, K., Der Mezkalinrausch., 1927. Berlin, Springer.Google Scholar
Block, W., Zeitschr. f. Naturforschung, 1953, (8b), 440.Google Scholar
Idem and Block, K., Angew. Chem., 1952, 64, 166.Google Scholar
Bovet, D., Bovet-Nitti, F., and Marini-Bettolo, G. B., Abstr. Communications 19th International Physiological Congress, Montreal, 1953, p. 224.Google Scholar
Idem and Longo, V. G., Rendiconti Ist. sup. Sanita, 1952, 15, 905; 15, 925.Google Scholar
Bradley, W., J. Chem. Soc., 1951, 499.Google Scholar
Clark, A. J., Handbuch d. exptl. Pharmakologie, IV, 1937. Springer, Berlin.Google Scholar
Draper, G., Amer. J. Med. Sci., 1935, 190, 545.Google Scholar
Fischer, R., Hoelle, A., and Seidenberg, S., Helv. Chim. Acta, 1951, 34, 210.Google Scholar
Fischer, R., Schweiz. Zeitschr. f. Psychologie, 1946, 9, 573.Google Scholar
Fischer, R., and Larose, P., J. Bact., 1952a, 64, 435.Google Scholar
Fischer, R., and Larose, P., Can. J. Med. Sci., 1952b, 30, 86.Google Scholar
Fischer, R., Experientia, 1953a, 9, 335.Google Scholar
Fischer, R., Monatsschr. Psychiat. a. Neurol., 1953b, 126, 315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, R., Experientia, 1953c, 9, 20.Google Scholar
Fischer, R., Georgi, F., and Weber, R., Schweiz. Med. Wchschr., 1951, 81, 817.Google Scholar
Fischer, R., Science, 1951, 114, 265.Google Scholar
Forrer, G. R., and Goldner, R. D., A.M.A. Arch. Neurol., 1951, 65, 581.Google Scholar
Greiber, M. F., Amer. J. Psychiat., 1947, 104, 306.Google Scholar
Halpern, L., Streifler, M., and Laszlo, L., Am. J. Psychiat., 1953, 110, 366.Google Scholar
Harrer, G., and Urban, H. J., Der Nervenarzt, 1953, 24, 63.Google Scholar
Harvey, St. C., and Nickerson, M., J. Pharmacol. and Exper. Therap., 1953, 109, 328.Google Scholar
Hoobler, S. W., and Dontas, A. S., Pharmacol. Rev., 1953, 5, 135.Google Scholar
Hyde, R. W., Personal communication.Google Scholar
Laborit, H., Paper presented in Bonn at the 20th Meeting of German Pharmacologists, 4–7 October, 1953.Google Scholar
Larose, P., and Fischer, R., Research (London) 1952, 5, 419.Google Scholar
Idem, Science, 1953a, 117, 449. Idem, Schw. Z. Pathol. u. Bakt., 1953b, 16, 97.Google Scholar
Liddell, D. W., and Weil-Malherbe, H., J. Neurol. Neurosurg. Psychiat., 1953, 16, 7.Google Scholar
Lucy, J., Private communication.Google Scholar
Mann, I., Brit. J. Ophthalm., 1947, 4, 244.Google Scholar
Marquardt, P., and Schumacher, H., Paper presented in Bonn at the 20th Meeting of German Pharmacologists, 4–7 October, 1953.Google Scholar
Mayer-Gross, W., McAdam, W., and Walker, J. W., Nature (London), 1951, 168, 827.Google Scholar
Idem, J. Mental Sci., 1953, 99, 804.Google Scholar
Nickerson, M., Henry, J. W., and Nomaguchi, G. A., J. Pharmacol. and Exper. Therap., 1953, 107, 300.Google Scholar
Rothlin, E., Private communication.Google Scholar
Sawyer, Ch. H., and Parkerson, G. R. Jr., Endocrinology, 1953, 52, 346.Google Scholar
Schöberl, A., Naturwissenschaften, 1953, 40, 390.Google Scholar
Solms, H., Schweiz. Med. Wchschr., 1953, 83, 356.Google Scholar
Schayer, R. W., Kennedy, J., and Smiley, R. L., J. Biol. Chem., 1953, 202, 39.Google Scholar
Stefaniuk, B., Private communication.Google Scholar
Stoll, W. A., Schweiz. Arch. Neurol, 1947, 60, 1.Google Scholar
Szatmari, A., Private communication.Google Scholar
Walter-Buel, W., Monatsschr. Psychiat. a. Neurol. (Swiss), 1949, 118, 129.Google Scholar
Weese, H., Paper presented in Bonn at the 20th Meeting of German Pharmacologists, 4–7 October, 1953.Google Scholar
Williams, M., Psychosom. Med., 1953, 15, 456.Google Scholar
Witt, P. N., Experientia, 1951, 7, 310.Google Scholar
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.