Talk:Etorphine

Pharmacology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chemicals Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.ChemicalsWikipedia:WikiProject ChemicalsTemplate:WikiProject Chemicalschemicals articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Etorphine.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 07:53, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Absorption through the skin

The citation number 4 is not relevent. I am a doctor and it is difficult to belive that human skin could absorb this fast enough to be fatal however someone should find verification of this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.33.86.5 (talk) 02:46, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Doctors are not scientists, just like a mechanic isn't one either. Skin can in fact be penetrated in minutes. http://annhyg.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/43/6/405 93.161.105.229 (talk) 12:18, 21 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the past, some vets added the solvent DMSO (dimethyl sulfoxide) to etorphine to shorten the absorption time, and therefore reduce the time it took from darting to unconsciousness. This is no longer acceptable practice because DMSO causes etorphine to be absorbed through the skin, making human accidents and possible fatalities much more likely. Without the addition of a solvent, etorphine does not cross the skin barrier and can be washed off with water. In the case of accidents, there is still a danger of inhaling the drug if a fine spray or mist is created. The antidote naltrexone should always be on hand when etorphine is being used. An excellent overview of etorphine and other immobilization drugs and their uses is given in The Capture and Care Manual: Capture, Care, Accommodation, and Transportation of Wild African Animals by A. McKenzie, 1993, South African Veterinary Foundation, ISBN 0620176083. The book is out of print, unfortunately. Another great source is Zoo and Wildlife Medicine Current Therapy by Murray E Fowler, DVM and R. Eric Miller, DVM, 2007, Saunders. Vetasartist (talk) 12:23, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dexter

Probably Dexter actually is using another drug. The producers could conceal the true name of the drug, because they don't want to give criminals this information. McGyver constructed (something like) a bomb and selected the wrong materials. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.55.131.205 (talk) 15:15, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it's correct - see the newest episode (Season 5 - Episode 4, Beauty and the Beast), he mentions M99 at around 10th minute. 131.111.139.100 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:18, 18 October 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Yeah, I second that. Episode 5x06 it is also mentioned, in the sixteenth minute. However, I also see the point of the producers making Dexter say that while in his own universe he in fact uses something else. However, as M99 will clearly also take someone down, that would not be very effective. Maybe the text should reflect that he says he uses it without explicitly stating that he actually uses it. Opinions? Snikch 02:49, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's fiction guys, just a TV show. There is no real Dexter using real M99. Creative liberty allows them to say that he uses whatever they want without it being true. I mean really, it's Dexter. It's already a fairly improbable show, much as I like it (it led me here...). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.240.189.152 (talk) 22:12, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am wondering if the information about Dexter's Alias, Patrick Bateman, has a place in this article. It is an article about etorphine, not Dexter. Silverstairs (talk) 22:42, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Image wrong?

Someone on this chemical website here says that the etorphine and related opioids on Wikipedia are drawn wrong, could someone clarify and correct if indeed wrong? Nagelfar (talk) 16:33, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

They match the ones in Daniel Lednicer's book Central Analgetics, and he is quite a recognised expert in the field, but this book was published nearly 30 years ago and does have a few typos. I think they are correct, the cis/trans confusion with the bridge is just from trying to squash the 3D structure flat in a 2D drawing, of course it is cis but trying to show this without it looking very crowded is difficult! The side chain stereochemistry in the etorphine drawing is ambiguous and should perhaps be drawn more clearly. Meodipt (talk) 11:07, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The synthesis image is incorrect. The endoetheno double-bond is pictured as being dihydrated and the n-propyl feature should bind to the 7-position in the morphinan skeleton. Interestingly, it seems that quite many opioid synthesis images in Wikipedia have errors: Etorphine, Nalorphine, Pentamorphone; maybe more. Tinnunculus (talk) 07:15, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dexter.

I have removed the following list:

Season 1, episode 6. Season 4, episode 8. Season 5, episode 4. Season 5, episode 5. Season 5, episode 6. Season 5, episode 8. Season 6, episode 1. Season 7, episode 12.

And instead replaced it with 'in numerous episodes throughout the show.' Obviously 1. managing a list like that requires more effort than is relevant within the scope of this article, 2. the relevance of the episodes and frequency of mention are not within the scope of this article, 3. the exponential growth of this list could distort the scope of this article, and 4. it looked stupid because the rest of the article is in prose and suddenly you have a bullet point list making up 25% of the entire article space using up only 5% of the horizontal leaving a disproportionate amount of white space.

If you're a Dexter fanboy and feel that it really, REALLY must be included please ensure it suits the style of the article and adapt it to fit the prose otherwise it will just end up being removed again. BaSH PR0MPT (talk) 09:14, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Any reason to not simply have a Referenced in Popular Culture section with one line mentioning Dexter. Would that satisfy everyone while leaving room for any future refernces that might occur? --Stubborn Myth (talk) 04:01, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from article

I have moved the following content here because it lacks context/explanation. If anyone wants to use it to improve the article, here it is. -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:52, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[[File:Etorphine synthesis.png|thumb|700px|center|Etorphine synthesis <ref>{{cite journal | author = | year = 1970 | title = Novel analgetics and molecular rearrangements in the morphine-thebaine group. XVIII. 3-Deoxy-6,14-endo-etheno-6,7,8,14-tetrahydrooripavines | journal = Journal of Medicinal Chemistry | volume = 13 | issue = 3 | pmid = 5441135| pages = 525–527 | url = | format = | accessdate = | doi = 10.1021/jm00297a041 | last1 = Lewis | first1 = J. W. | last2 = Readhead | first2 = M. J. }}</ref>]]

just because it does not have an explanation that everyone can understand does not mean it should be removed. it is accurate and sufficiently sourced so it should remain. Fantesykikachu (talk) 04:57, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pop culture

It seems like it would be a good idea to add a section about etorphine/ M99 in pop culture. Others have talked about Dexter, but there are other TV shows such as Scandal which also use it. Just my thoughts. Jentacular (talk) 06:17, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]