User talk:Melody Prisca
The purpose of removing the portion about inhibition of Deoxymiroestrol and Miroestrol was because that part of the test was to establish dosage. How much each phytoestrogen inhibited bioavailable estradiol determined how much of the chemicals were binding to estradiol receptors. To establish a dosage to be used in the further assays. In all three assays that followed both Deoxymiroestrol and Miroestrol were many times more potent. So much so that it misleading to say that they were comparable.
100-1500 times more potent is not comparable. It is not similar, and is misleading to suggest that. Would we say that Deoxymiroestrol was similar in activity to estradiol? Because it is a lot closer in activity to actual estradiol than it is to other phytoestrogens. Estradiol being anywhere from 1-10 times as potent. That is a much smaller range than 100-1500. It's activity is closer to that of bioidentcal estrogen than to the very weak effect most phytoestrogens typically have.
Again the first part was to test for inhibition. How much of the chemical did you need to cause the desired level of inhibition, and thus the desired amount of phytoestrogens bonded to estradiol receptors. The latter part of the article was to show activity and effects produced. It takes a comparable amount of Deoxymiroestrol and Miroestrol to cause binding to estradiol receptors as other phytoestrogens. However in terms of effects achieved they are in a league all their own as far as natural herbal estrogens go.
Start a discussion with Melody Prisca
Talk pages are where people discuss how to make content on Wikipedia the best that it can be. Start a new discussion to connect and collaborate with Melody Prisca. What you say here will be public for others to see.
