Die Struktur von Tadalafil erlaubt eine selektive Bindung an die Bindungsstelle der PDE5 und minimiert gleichzeitig die Interaktion mit PDE6, was visuelle Nebenwirkungen einschränkt. Seine Verteilung im Organismus erfolgt breit, wobei das Verteilungsvolumen etwa 63 Liter beträgt. Über 90 % des Wirkstoffs sind an Plasmaproteine gebunden. Die Wirkung bleibt unabhängig von der Nahrungsaufnahme konstant. Der Abbauweg über CYP3A4 kann durch Hemmer wie Ritonavir oder Ketoconazol verlangsamt werden, was die Plasmakonzentrationen deutlich erhöht. In diesem Kontext wird cialis 20mg preis häufig in Bezug auf pharmakokinetische Wechselwirkungen erwähnt.

Mcs – forschung und studiendesign

Bibliographie MCS – Forschung und Studiendesign

37 Artikel über Forschungsmethoden und Studiendesignvorschläge zu MCS.
Publiziert in wissenschaftlichen Fachzeitungen (peer-review) bis 10/99.
(Publikationen in Zeitschriften von Klinischen Ökologen oder Briefe an Herausgeber
ausgenommen)
Alphabetisch sortiert nach Autor

1. Anonymous. 1998. NIEHS seeks data on multiple chemical sensitivity [news].
Environ Health Perspect 106:A226
2. Bascom, R., W.J. Meggs, M. Frampton, K. Hudnell, K. Kilburn, G. Kobal, M.
Medinsky, and W. Rea. 1997. Neurogenic inflammation: with additional discussion of
central and perceptual integration of nonneurogenic inflammation. Environ Health
Perspect 105:531-537.
3. Bell, I.R., G.E. Schwartz, C.M. Baldwin, E.E. Hardin, N.G. Klimas, J.P. Kline, R.
Patarca, and Z.-Y. Song. 1997. Individual differences in neural sensitization and the
role of context in illness from low-level environmental chemical exposures. Environ
Health Perspect 105:457-466.
4. Bell, I.R., J.3. Rossi, M.E. Gilbert, G. Kobal, L.A. Morrow, D.B. Newlin, B.A. Sorg,
and R.W. Wood. 1997. Testing the neural sensitization and kindling hypothesis for
illness from low levels of environmental chemicals. Environ Health Perspect 105:539-
547.
5. Bolla, K.I. 1996. Neuropsychological evaluation for detecting alterations in the
central nervous system after chemical exposure. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 24:Pt
2):S48-51
6. Cohen, N., H. Kehrl, B. Berglund, A. O'Leary, G. Ross, J. Seltzer, and C. Weisel.
1997. Psychoneuroimmunology. Environ Health Perspect 105:527-529.
7. Cullen, M.R. and C.A. Redlich. 1995. Significance of individual sensitivity to
chemicals: elucidation of host susceptibility by use of biomarkers in environmental
health research. [Review] [21 refs]. Clin.Chem. 41:Pt 2):1809-13
8. Deyo, R.A., B.M. Psaty, G. Simon, E.H. Wagner, and G.S. Omenn. 1997. The
messenger under attack -- intimidation of researchers by special- interest groups [see
comments]. N Engl J Med 336:1176-1180.
9. Dietert, R.R. and A. Hedge. 1998. Chemical sensitivity and the immune system: a
paradigm to approach potential immune involvement. Neurotoxicology 19:253-257.
10. Doull, J. 1996. Specificity and dosimetry of toxicologic responses. Regul Toxicol
Pharmacol 24:Pt 2):S55-7
11. Dyer, R.S. and K. Sexton. 1996. What can research contribute to regulatory decisions about the health risks of multiple chemical sensitivity? Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 24:Pt 2):S139-51 12. Eissenberg, T. and R.R. Griffiths. 1997. Human drug discrimination and multiple chemical sensitivity: caffeine exposure as an experimental model. Environ Health Perspect 105:509-513. 13. Fiedler, N., H. Kipen, B. Natelson, and J. Ottenweller. 1996. Chemical sensitivities and the Gulf War: Department of Veterans Affairs Research Center in basic and clinical science studies of environmental hazards. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 24:Pt 2):S129-38 14. Hyams, K.C. 1998. Developing case definitions for symptom-based conditions: the problem of specificity. Epidemiol Rev 20:148-156. 15. Jewett, D.L. 1992. Research strategies for investigating multiple chemical sensitivity. Toxicol.Ind.Health 8:175-179. 16. Kehrl, H.R. 1997. Laboratory testing of the patient with multiple chemical sensitivity. Environ Health Perspect 105 Suppl 2:443-4:443-444. 17. Kiesswetter, E. 1999. 'Multiple Chemical Sensitivity', the relevance of toxic, neurobiological and psychic effect mechanisms [In Process Citation]. Zentralbl Hyg Umweltmed 202:191-205. 18. Kipen, H. and N. Fiedler. 1997. Experimental approaches to chemical sensitivity: introduction and overview. Environ Health Perspect 105:Suppl 2:405-7 19. Kreutzer, R. and Neutra, R. R. Final Report: Evaluating Individual Reporting Sensitivities to Multiple Chemicals. #PB96-187646. 1996. Atlanta GA, US ATSDR. 20. MacPhail, R.C. 1997. Evolving concepts of chemical sensitivity. Environ Health Perspect 105:455-456. 21. Mayberg, H. 1994. Critique: SPECT studies of multiple chemical sensitivity. [Review] [40 refs]. Toxicol.Ind.Health 10:661-666. 22. McKeown-Eyssen, G., L. Marshall, C. Baines, and G. Rodin. 1996. Research initiatives at the University of Toronto Environmental Hypersensitivity Research Unit. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 24:Pt 2):S126-8 23. Miller, C.S., N.A. Ashford, R. Doty, M. Lamielle, D. Otto, A. Rahill, and L. Wallace. 1997. Empirical approaches for the investigation of toxicant-induced loss of tolerance. Environ Health Perspect 105:515-519. 24. Miller, C.S. and T.J. Prihoda. 1999. The Environmental Exposure and Sensitivity Inventory (EESI): a standardized approach for measuring chemical intolerances for research and clinical applications. Toxicol Ind Health 15:370-385. 25. Neutra, R.R. 1994. Some preliminary thoughts on the potential contribution of
epidemiology to the question of multiple chemical sensitivity. Public Health Rev.
22:271-278.
26. Newlin, D.B. 1994. Drug sensitization, substance abuse, and chemical sensitivity.
Toxicol.Ind.Health 10:463-480.
27. Newlin, D.B. 1997. A behavior-genetic approach to multiple chemical sensitivity.
Environ Health Perspect 105:505-508.
28. Newlin, D.B. 1999. Evolutionary game theory and multiple chemical sensitivity.
Toxicol Ind Health 15:313-322.
29. Norseth, T. 1994. Measuring strategies for the nineties. Future needs from the
health point of view. Analyst 119:3-7.
30. Salvaggio, J.E. 1996. Understanding clinical immunological testing in alleged
chemically induced environmental illnesses. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 24:Pt 2):S16-
27
31. Schmidt, C.W. 1998. Environmental health 2000 [news]. Environ Health Perspect
106:A600-A603
32. Selner, J.C. 1996. Chamber challenges: the necessity of objective observation.
Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 24:Pt 2):S87-95
33. Siegel, S. and R. Kreutzer. 1997. Pavlovian conditioning and multiple chemical
sensitivity. Environ Health Perspect 105:521-526.
34. Weiss, B. 1994. Low-level chemical sensitivity: a perspective from behavioral
toxicology. Toxicol Ind Health 10:605-617.
35. Weiss, B. 1997. Experimental strategies for research on multiple chemical
sensitivity. Environ Health Perspect 105:487-494.
36. Wetherell, A. 1997. Cognitive and psychomotor performance tests and
experiment design in multiple chemical sensitivity. Environ Health Perspect 105:495-
503.
37. Wolf, C. 1996. [Multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS)--the so-called chemical
multiple hypersensitivity]. [Review] [25 refs] [German]. Versicherungsmedizin 48:175-
178.

Anmerkung:
Bei ErgänzPublizierung der Liste nur mit Genehmigung des Autors.

Source: http://www.csn-deutschland.de/PDF/mcs_bib_forschung1.pdf