Talk:Mitragynine/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled

Why is this article listed as a "disassociative, psychedelic, or deliriant" stub? This chemical is a stimulant/depressant with opioid agonist effects, and is in no way a psychedelic, disassociative, or deliriant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.74.238.25 (talk) 10:47, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

mitragynine pseudoindoxyl

the articel states that this compount possess little mu affinity. when i read the referring link i get the impression that it infact possesses a quite significant affinity, thus being a marked mu-agonist. am i wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gbgjohn (talk • contribs) 04:38, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Request for new CAS verification site

Mitragynine doesn't appear on commonchemistry.org. The search results page suggests searching SciFinder® or STN®. Dreadfullyboring (talk) 02:38, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

3D structure

Hello, for my class assignment I will make a 3D structure of mitragynine. I will keep editing the photo over time so please tell me I can improve upon anything. Ananasanana (talk) 04:09, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

Subjective Perceptions

This entire section about "subjective effects" is completely wrong. There is no doubt about mitragynine acting on opiod receptors as a considerable amount of studies have demonstrated, which makes it an opioid per definition. It is pretty irrelevant that there exists a large amount of subjective reports. I don't know why this has been added like this but it's complete nonsense.

https://theholisticnews.files.wordpress.com/2016/07/pdf-kratom-book.pdf --91.42.50.201 (talk) 08:58, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

I'm actually going to go ahead and remove this section. There is some weird language that feels like it's attempting to associate this compound with a current propagandized issue (suicides are a larger cause of death than opioids, and intentional suicides using opioids are counted in both categories according to the CDC, so which is the "epidemic", exactly?). This compound isn't "touted" as anything. It works as an analgesic according to all of the scientific data collected on it including the references on this page. "Touted" implies that this is exaggerated somehow.

That's not why I'm removing it though. As it stands now every reference it uses is talking about whole kratom plant which contains a complex alkaloid mixture of which mitragynine is usually the most abundant... but does not have the highest binding affinity at any of the major opioid receptors when compared to other compounds that may be present in varying amounts. The section belongs in the kratom article if anywhere, as it does not describe experiences with the pure compound mitragynine that the article is actually about in any way. The differences in binding affinity are such that a rough analogy would be including a subjective experiences section in an article about caffeine that described a set of incredibly strong stimulant effects and comparison with attention deficit disorder medications, then you click through to the references it uses and find that they were talking about a new brand of soda; the grape flavor has valium and large amount of cocaine added, the lemon flavor has an incredibly high sugar concentration and a tiny amount of cocaine, and the orange has 10mg of methamphetamine in it. Then someone goes on to say that the different effects people had from these sodas were "paradoxical effects".

That's an obvious exaggeration because nothing in kratom is nearly as dangerous to your body as flavored soda ;-) , but I think it gets the general point across. A MOR agonist is vastly different subjectively than a KOR agonist, for example. The MOR agonist will usually be euphoric and cause respiratory depression but the KOR will be dysphoric instead... they both relieve pain, but the KOR agonist may become intolerable to some people in terms of mental effects before the effective analgesic dose, just like the MOR may not be usable for someone with breathing problems and is easier to get addicted to because it feels good instead of bizarre. Finally, I was unable to find any mitragynine report that is considered a valid source for wikipedia. I'm not sure that the pure compound is even available enough for a meta-study of users to be performed. A Shortfall Of Gravitas (talk) 20:28, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Mitragynine as a controlled substance in some areas

In at least two areas of the US where Kratom itself is supposedly banned, the plant itself is not banned specifically, and this is because this compound and the 7-hydroxy compound are controlled there. In Indiana this is definitely the case, and Sarasota County, FL went about things the same way. I'm not sure how the few other states that did bans of the plant itself worded it and whether the isolated compounds still remain legal there. If I remember my reading of the laws they sort of require a packaging / form intended for human consumption, which is why certain plants like Salvia divinorum were listed specifically rather than as active compounds when they were banned in Indiana. In addition, the Indiana laws reworded everything in 2014 to list mitragynine as a controlled substance rather than a synthetic drug, but it doesn't seem to be clear in the modified law what the actual distinction is or why this change was made.

In any event, those areas should probably be added to the chemical template under legality, as well as on the 7-hydroxy page if it isn't there, since they're called out specifically. I'll figure it out when I have time (I'm great at breaking templates sometimes) if nobody else does but I thought I'd leave this here for reference. A Shortfall Of Gravitas (talk) 21:09, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

to be added

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/adb.12639 Kevin143 (talk) 16:52, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

The pharmacokinetics picture

Anyone know why there's a screenshot of a zoomed-in badly jpeg compressed cleartype-enabled HTML table instead of just... I dunno... a table in the page? Do we just absolutely hate everyone who has to access the site using a screen reader or other accessibility device or was this somebody's clever way of attempting to dodge some kind of perceived copyright issue with referencing numbers? --A Shortfall Of Gravitas (talk) 05:52, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top.
The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons you might want to). --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇} 03:48, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 August 2018 and 7 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mtodd41.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:19, 17 January 2022 (UTC)