## SHAM(e) math [NCA / SHAM]

Hi Nastia,

»

Though I never just couldn’t get into Cortázar’s books, that’s a nice quote (though having both

» […] I have strong doubts that our local library has books on pharmacokinetics on german printed in 50th

I believe it. I had only the “expanded edition”:

See also there.

» » As a rule of thumb at \(\small{MRT}\) ~⅔ of the drug is eliminated. […]

» I was wondering from where such a rule of thumb was going and integrated the area for simple exponential elimination. It turns out that at MRT (1-exp(-1))~0,632 of the drug is eliminated for IV and slightly lower for EV (so the rule of pinky is 0,632 versus the rule of thumb (2/3=0,(6))

Absolutely correct! This was a presentation for physicians (‼); I wanted to keep it simple. A relative error of 5.2% doesn’t hurt to make a point. Of course, much worse than Archimedes’ phantastic \(\small{3+\frac{10}{71}}<\pi<3+\frac{1}{7}\).

» As for physics there exists inaccuracy in the considerations on the slide "Excursion to Hydrodynamics". "Same proportions is emptied in the same time interval" is true only when you are solving school problems with a pool. Exactly the unexpired volume leaked depends on the form of the vessel. For the cylindric vessel for example water height and thus the volume is proportional to t

Correct again! I brainlessly used examples of old textbooks (as usual). Homework: what happens if we drill a hole in a Klein bottle?

» I've calculated C

» $$C_c=\frac{1}{3}\frac{\sum\limits_{i}(t_{i+1}-t_i)(C^{2}_{i}+C^{2}_{i+1}+C_{i}\cdot C_{i+1})}{\sum\limits_{i}(t_{i+1}-t_{i})(C_{i+1}+C_i)}$$ Although it has C

Surprises me. Given, I didn’t assess it for ages. Maybe I’m wrong again.

»

*Uno puede estar mirando las estrellas y al mismo tiempo verse la punta de las pestañas (Julio Cortázar)*Though I never just couldn’t get into Cortázar’s books, that’s a nice quote (though having both

*estrellas*and*pestañas*in focus would be a difficult feat).» […] I have strong doubts that our local library has books on pharmacokinetics on german printed in 50th

I believe it. I had only the “expanded edition”:

Dost FH. *Grundlagen der Pharmakokinetik.* Stuttgart: Verlag G. Thieme; 1968.

See also there.

» » As a rule of thumb at \(\small{MRT}\) ~⅔ of the drug is eliminated. […]

» I was wondering from where such a rule of thumb was going and integrated the area for simple exponential elimination. It turns out that at MRT (1-exp(-1))~0,632 of the drug is eliminated for IV and slightly lower for EV (so the rule of pinky is 0,632 versus the rule of thumb (2/3=0,(6))

Absolutely correct! This was a presentation for physicians (‼); I wanted to keep it simple. A relative error of 5.2% doesn’t hurt to make a point. Of course, much worse than Archimedes’ phantastic \(\small{3+\frac{10}{71}}<\pi<3+\frac{1}{7}\).

» As for physics there exists inaccuracy in the considerations on the slide "Excursion to Hydrodynamics". "Same proportions is emptied in the same time interval" is true only when you are solving school problems with a pool. Exactly the unexpired volume leaked depends on the form of the vessel. For the cylindric vessel for example water height and thus the volume is proportional to t

^{2}. If you want to have a constant proportion you need a vessel with a form of parabola x^{4}that is clepsydra or consider Mariotte’s bottle .Correct again! I brainlessly used examples of old textbooks (as usual). Homework: what happens if we drill a hole in a Klein bottle?

» I've calculated C

_{c}for several real studies according to simple linear trapezoidal rule:» $$C_c=\frac{1}{3}\frac{\sum\limits_{i}(t_{i+1}-t_i)(C^{2}_{i}+C^{2}_{i+1}+C_{i}\cdot C_{i+1})}{\sum\limits_{i}(t_{i+1}-t_{i})(C_{i+1}+C_i)}$$ Although it has C

^{2}in it, it's variability was always lower than that of C_{max}, but I should've check it more carefully.Surprises me. Given, I didn’t assess it for ages. Maybe I’m wrong again.

—

Helmut Schütz

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮

Science Quotes

*Dif-tor heh smusma*🖖Helmut Schütz

The quality of responses received is directly proportional to the quality of the question asked. 🚮

Science Quotes

### Complete thread:

- Fantastic PK parameters and where to find them Astea 2020-06-12 14:22 [NCA / SHAM]
- Fantastic post 👍🏽 Helmut 2020-06-12 16:23
- Rattleback Astea 2020-06-13 10:17
- Chatter Helmut 2020-06-13 12:28
- Reinventing the Hula-Hoop Astea 2020-06-16 01:33
- Hula-Hoop references Helmut 2020-06-16 13:07
- Prof. Keller vs. Yamaoka mittyri 2020-06-17 14:28
- SHAM(e) math Astea 2020-06-23 14:41
- SHAM(e) mathHelmut 2020-06-23 15:55
- OT: Möbius strip Astea 2020-06-23 21:41
- OT: Möbius strip Helmut 2020-06-24 11:29

- OT: Möbius strip Astea 2020-06-23 21:41

- SHAM(e) mathHelmut 2020-06-23 15:55

- SHAM(e) math Astea 2020-06-23 14:41

- Prof. Keller vs. Yamaoka mittyri 2020-06-17 14:28

- Hula-Hoop references Helmut 2020-06-16 13:07

- Reinventing the Hula-Hoop Astea 2020-06-16 01:33

- Chatter Helmut 2020-06-13 12:28

- Rattleback Astea 2020-06-13 10:17
- More stuff Helmut 2020-06-13 15:28
- MRT and Gravity duration mittyri 2020-06-14 22:24
- Fantastic PK parameters and where to find them ElMaestro 2020-06-16 09:46
- Cauchy distribution mittyri 2020-06-16 10:54
- Cauchy distribution Helmut 2020-06-16 13:14
- Cauchy distribution ElMaestro 2020-06-20 10:33
- noncentral normal ratio mittyri 2020-06-20 23:04

- Cauchy distribution mittyri 2020-06-16 10:54

- Fantastic post 👍🏽 Helmut 2020-06-12 16:23