Template talk:Opioids

message: A spammer tried inserting links to illegal drug purchasing websites located on the following domain names: mysteria.cz webzdarma.cz fromru.com land.ru atspace.us atspace.biz atspace.org
Spam seems to be a serious issue for drug related articles and templates.  I suggest taking more active measures than simply banning dynamic IP addresses, which is rather ineffective.
-Nathan J. Yoder 22:11, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Spam

message: Are any forms of endorphins (beta-endorphins) actually prescribed as a drug?  It seems to me that refers to the chemicals in the body, not any prescribed drug, so I'll remove it if there's no objections.  Nathan J. Yoder 19:39, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, originally it was the abiguous Endorphins before I edited it to beta-Endorphin. If the template is to be limited to pharmaceutical opioids, thebaine should probably be removed as well. --Bk0 19:44, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Endorphins 

message: opioids are endogenous to the human body whereas opiates are exogenous molecules or chemically synthesized molecules. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.195.108.249 (talk • contribs) 
:Actually, opiates come from the opium poppy, and opioids include opiates as well as synthetic and semi-synthetic drugs (and endogenous chemicals) that bind to the same receptors. --Galaxiaad 00:20, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  opioids vs opiates 

message: I think this template should be merged into Template:Analgesics, as only 3 pages include this one.  Template:Analgesics has a far longer list of opioids at the moment anyway. --Galaxiaad 00:28, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge?

message: Why are Naloxone and Naltrexone listed in the navigational box for Opioids? That's completely wrong, or if you take the stance that opioid antagonists "have something to do with opioids" and therefore belong in the navigational box, it's still grossly misleading.
::Hello. Opioid antagonists are opioids, though not producing morphine-like effects. Opioids are in wide sense of term all substances having an effect on/throug the opioid receptors, no matter whether agonists, partial agonists, mixed agonist-antagonists, or pure antagonists. They fit perfectly here.--84.163.84.99 18:18, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Opioid Antagonists

message: Hi, I would like to propose merging the sub-classes "4-Ph-piperdidine derivatives" and "Prodine derivatives", since their chemical structure and more importantly, their pharmacophore moieties in structures are the same: a quarternary C atom in the position 4- of a 1-substitued piperidine ring, attached to an aromatic ring and another functional group (either carbonyl, or alkanoyloxy/alkoxy group).
Comments?--84.163.84.99 18:27, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see the principal difference, yet as stated above, the pharmacophore portion of their structure is essentialy the same.--84.163.86.96 03:26, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge classes "4-Phenylpiperidines" and "Prodine derivatives" 

message: because, it's an incorrect name for dimethylthiambutene.--84.163.86.96 20:29, 18 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Dithienylbutenyl dimethylamine" deleted  

message: I don't agree that "Bemidones" should be a family of their own. There are only two compounds in there, ketobemidone and bemidone/hydroxypethidine (two names for the same drug). Also while ketobemidone has NMDA antagonist effects, this just makes it an atypical phenylpiperidine derivative, I don't see that this makes it structurally distinct. Bemidone is m-hydroxy pethidine, so why should it be in a different category to pethidine itself? And I'm not aware of any data showing that bemidone has NMDA antagonist effects anyway.
The chart is ordered by structure rather than by activity, otherwise shouldn't ketobemidone be classed with lefetamine as they both have mu-opioid agonist/NMDA antagonist effects? And for that matter, pethidine, tramadol and tapentadol are all mu-agonist/monoamine reuptake inhibitors. Structurally speaking, ketobemidone, bemidone and pethidine are all 4-phenylpiperidine derivatives and so should go together. Prodines however should be different because of that 3-alkyl group on the piperidine ring which the rest of the 4-phenylpiperidine derivatives don't have.Meodipt 09:13, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Bemidones

message: There is a problematic overlapping issue at hand as codeine, morphinone, oxycodone et al. are also morphinans, but are only classified as derivatives. Could someone more experienced fill this gap?83.5.237.30 23:35, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problematic overlapping 

message: -> Meodipt : Heya, how would you classify Drotebanol (14-Hydroxy-dihydro-6 β-thebainol-4-methylether)? Would you classify it as a Morphinan (since it lacks the 4,5-epoxy bridge)? Structure is here: http://www.unodc.org/images/odccp/bulletin/bulletin_1977-01-01_1_page005_img001_large.gif
Also, I was contemplating adding another 2 categories:
1) 5-Nitro-Benzimidazoles (for etonitazene, clonitazene etc.) 
2) Phenazepines (Ethoheptazine etc.)
Thoughts?
Aj1976 06:54, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Classifications 

message: Please, rename the "4-Phenylpiperidines" to "Pethidines", since you effectively cleaved up all other 4-phenylpiperidines (ketobemidons and prodines are 4-Ph-piperidines as well...),
further, "Open chain derivatives" are "Amidones", since "Alkoxams", "Thiambutenes" etc. are open chain derivatives as well.
Or, if you don't have objections, I do so myself, okay? Cheers. --84.163.124.217 17:06, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yet another renaming 

message: After some looking around, it appears that these two are the same compound under different names. The diphenyl analogue pictured as "oxpheneridine" on the isomerdesign website does not correspond to the chemical name given, and there is no reference to carbamethidine anywhere apart from the Canadian controlled drug schedules. It would appear this is a mistake made by the drafters of the Canadian law, they have put the same compound in twice, one entry having a chemical name that is incorrect, and they have then invented a new "common" name for the second entry. It is not unusual for legislators to make such a mistake, psilocin for instance is listed on the New Zealand Misuse of Drugs Act twice under different names; this is what happens when people without chemistry training draft laws that concern matters of chemistry. From a search on PubChem and ChemExper, the diphenyl analogue pictured on isomerdesign.com does not appear to be a known compound, although unfortunately I do not have access to a better database such as SciFinder Scholar at present. Meodipt 12:28, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Oxpheneridine/Carbamethidine

message: I've got a quick question. I've kinda forgotten but am I right in saying that it's not possible to confer antagonist properties to a phenylpiperidine with N- substituents like Allyl, Methylcyclopropyl etc.? Aj1976 05:04, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: SAR-related

message: Casomorphin, Dermorphin - do these need adding to the template? -- Teutonic Tamer 17:46, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Casomorphin, Dermorphin

message: Components of opium really needs to be split into its own template as it looks very messy as is, this template should be about opioid drugs, and does not need to include other plant components from the opium poppy.Meodipt (talk) 02:26, 3 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Components of opium

message: Hi. I just want you to know that I moved Azidomorphine from the "Codeine-Dionine family" to "Others" within semisynthetics. Reasons are 
*1. Unlike Codeine and related derivatives, Azidomorphine is not 3-alkylated;
*2. the 6- substitute, azide, is a pseudohalide group, thus more closely related to e.g. Chloromorphide and Chlorocodide
Hope, that no one has objections...If so, please let me know. Cheers,--84.163.108.175 (talk) 18:04, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Azidomorphine 

message: Isn't morpholinylethylmorphine the same as pholcodine?--84.163.111.190 (talk) 01:31, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Made redirect / mention in article. Nagelfar (talk) 12:08, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Morpholinylethylmorphine? 

message: What family would a propionyl ester class opioid like dipropionylmorphine fit in? There is no article or place in this template yet for dipropionylmorphine. I hear it crosses the BBB faster than heroin etc. Apparently "3,6-propionylmorphine" has been shown to be preferred in tests of opioid addiction on monkeys by them over heroin. There is yet to be an article on this opioid as well, are they the same? They must at least be very similar. Nagelfar (talk) 15:47, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, I updated accordingly. Nagelfar (talk) 20:44, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  dipropionylmorphine / 3,6-propionylmorphine 

message: Well I created an opioid article from a theoretical opioid at a drug discussion forum, but I don't think I can save it from speedy deletion so I'll put most of what I put in the article here as I found it interesting nonetheless; if it were ever to become widely discussed as a theoretical opioid due to its function it may be notable enough one day to have it's own article, so here it is. (the collapsing table makes it all bolded so just ignore that part):
3-acetyl-6-propanoyl-14-ethoxy-dihydromorphine
3-acetyl-6-propanoyl-14-ethoxy-dihydromorphine is a theoretical super-opioid created for maximum recreational subjective effects. Conceptualized from a knowledge of the mechanisms upon which the molecular structure of existing opioids rely for their mode action becoming subject to use (though not necessarily to higher abuse or habituation due to maximized duration).
The action of this opioid relies on its hydroxy in 3-position being initially exposed creating increased lipophilicity while also exposing the lighter acetyl group which allows for a quicker onset of effects. This is coupled with a high potency from the 14-ethoxy and also an enduring activity due to the saturated 7-8 bond.bluelight.ru drug discussion forum.
*Molecular image of 3-acetyl-6-propanoyl-14-ethoxy-dihydromorphine
 Nagelfar (talk) 02:14, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm just on the look out for new chemical articles with sourced information, hobbyist discussion may not be the best first party sourcing, however. ;-) Nagelfar (talk) 00:18, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Theoretical opioids 

message: Since the template seems to be about opioids, of which morphine happens to be one, what about morphine derivatives that aren't opioids like Apomorphine? Do they actually belong on this template? We have opioids which aren't morphine derivatives like Salvinorin A. If it does belong, shouldn't it be more rightly 'opioids & morphine derivatives'? Nagelfar (talk) 20:34, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, but now how many of the "Natural Opiates: Opium Alkaloids" are not opioids either since most of those have no opioid activity? Might it just be easier to make this an opium derivative & opioid template via name move? If not, we'd have to clear out a lot of those and source whether they had opioid activity, without articles on the majority of them, that could be a difficult task. Cyclohexyloxy-α-phenethylamine was just removed due to lack of sourcing as an opioid agonist for example. Nagelfar (talk) 23:06, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Given the size of the template as it is, I think we should only include substances with known binding to opioid receptors. Otherwise, the template just becomes a mess rather than a navigational aid. St3vo (talk) 03:06, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Then it appears a great number of these alkloids should be removed. Nagelfar (talk) 00:31, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apomorphine not an opioid? 

message: Not very many of the semi-synthetics listed seem to be prodrugs, I notice pretty much just heroin (acetylated morphine) & dipropanoylmorphine. The rest pretty much substitute a section or group on the molecule to change the basic morphinan function and structure. However I have read esterizing oxycodone has been done and works much the same acetylating morphine, making a prodrug form of oxycodone. 14-cinnamyloxycodone is an oxycodone ester. Similar can or have probably been done with other semisynthetics. Nagelfar (talk) 16:09, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: By semi-synthetics that are pro-drugs, I mean semi-synthetic first, then pro-drug additionally, not semi-synthetic by virtue of being pro-drugs. That I only now noticed being confusing. Ester- or ether-izing an otherwise already altered morphine; this may be useful for morphine semi-synthetics that are less liable to quickly cross the BBB but are active, and esterizing/etherizing the 6 position of that less liable or quick semi-synthetic, make it able to more quickly pass through and have a viable pro-drug made of an otherwise not so viable semi-synthetic. Nagelfar (talk) 14:06, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  More semi-synthetics that are prodrugs? 

message: N,N,3-trimethyl-3-phenylbutan-1-amine is registered and classed with it's own number: LS-47438. so is attested to. Apparently it is the simplest molecule to follow the "morphine rule". The 2D diagram of the chemical is this or this. Nagelfar (talk) 18:13, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  N,N,3-trimethyl-3-phenylbutan-1-amine (# LS-47438) 

message: I notice the existence of entries written such as "Poppy Straw Concentrate(PSC) aka Concentrate of Poppy Straw" with two separate links to what would be one page, and this issue recurring throughout the template.
There are so many multiple names for each chemical that this should have to not be the case.
Also familiar names as part of the link or not part of the link has no consistency whatsoever. We have entries such as "Ethylmorphine (Dionine) (Codethyline, Dionine, &c.)" which look are confounded within themselves as to what style we are using here.
Nothing adheres to any wikipedia Manual of Style consistency whether it's slashes separating exact & common names (i.e. "Dihydrodesoxycodeine/Desocodeine") or parenthesis (i.e. "Diacetyldihydromorphine (Dihydroheroin)").
We need to resolve this issue of the template. Nagelfar (talk) 00:27, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Also shouldn't "Codeine-Barbiturate Salts" go into 'Alkaloid Salts Mixtures' or be removed entirely? (Every brand name permutation, such as oxycodone-APAP mixtures for example, are not given because they are not a chemical in themselves, nor do they have historic provenance such as the opium tinctures). Furthermore how is something such as Codeine Salicylate any different than morphine 'HCl' versus 'tartrate' or freebase? Should such instances also be considered redundant and so removed? Nagelfar (talk) 05:14, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Quite agreed. I reverted back to the last "good" version as the changes since then were somewhat questionable, lots of redlinks added to the template for compounds that could exist but have never been made or at least are not notable, and the recategorisation had several errors and was not particularly useful. Meodipt (talk) 09:22, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks as if the IP reverted it back, and not even to the version I cleaned up of that, with no discussion or consensus. Nagelfar (talk) 05:00, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Oxycodone/naloxone & Targin (that redirects the same) has the same issue here in pertinence for Wikipedia. 184.76.53.217 (talk) 07:03, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template beginning to look sloppy again... 

message: This website:  speaks of "Benzylisoquinoline alkaloids present in human neuroblastoma cells" including morphine as one of them (the three given). The page is cited as examples of morphine potentially being an extreme scarce but naturally occuring endogenous ligand. Well the other two "Benzylisoquinoline alkaloids" given in the paper are norlaudanosoline & reticuline; interesting names, "..laudan.." makes me think it is a definite opioid, yet no article entry in Wikipedia yet for either. Could any in the know place them as redlinks where they would go here, if they indeed do? Nagelfar (talk) 12:56, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Salutaridine is a precursor for reticuline that has an article here on Wikipedia. Nagelfar (talk) 09:03, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Norlaudanosoline and Reticuline 

message: It was brought to my attention that 3-(3-methoxyphenyl)-3-ethoxycarbonyltropane and that the whole class of its derivatives are (may be AFAIK) opioids. Though they are also DARIs. Which makes me wonder if there are enough such substances, stimulants and depressants in one (such as Lefetamine; though it is of a different order than a DARI, it is a DA releaser.) that maybe even another template could be created; simultaneous CNS stimulant/depressant molecules. The stimulant and depressant should also be CNS, they need not be opioid for depressant (maybe GABAergic or such), and the stimulant may be of whatever quality as well; it just must display one or the other. If someone has 5 more so such chemicals we should make a template IMO. Nagelfar (talk) 13:10, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Tapentadol is another such dual acting stimulant / depressant of the CNS. These are also preparations that maybe could be noted in such another template if made- the likes of Desbutal & Dexamyl, etc. in a separate section thereon. Nagelfar (talk) 09:15, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tropane opioids. 

message: Fencamfamine keeps being added and removed. It has this very template on its own page; and the argument of it being a ligand seems to be made on its page. 71.34.69.204 (talk) 01:24, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fencamfamine 

message: Doing the reference of each red linked name makes for a long list on the bottom, See my old example here, this is in comparison to this version without such sourcing... I yet however cannot collapse the referenced entries at the bottom without them not showing up and giving an error. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:NavFrame may show how but the few examples that I tried from there did not work. Nagelfar (talk) 05:45, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Referencing each red link with the cite Wikipedia syntax within template. 

message: Then if 3,6-hydroacetylproprionylmorphine exists, wouldn't this make 6-monohydroacetylproprionylmorphine superior in immediate onset/activation and longer in duration (have 'more legs')? or would just the 6 position being such a freely rotatable ester affect binding or crossing the BBB or be an impossibility due to stability and remaining in such a chemical conformation for any duration unto in vivo administration or for some other reason? Nagelfar (talk) 19:11, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems I misunderstood the conformation of dihydroheroin, the hydrogen is not at the terminus of the ester branch as the name 'dihydroheroin' implies. Though 6-acetylhydromorphine may be the superior metabolite of dihydroheroin, what other complex esterized 6-position morphine monoesters could be made? Nagelfar (talk) 04:18, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  If [[dihydroheroin|dihydro'heroin']] and [[Acetylpropionylmorphine|acetylproprionylmorphine]] exist, then is dihydroacetylproprionylmorphine a possibility? 

message: Though it is made by semi-synthetic processes for pharmaceutical grade quantities, Hydromorphone is found in trace amounts in opium latex according to its article page. Should that be of note for this template that it is a trace component found? Many of the active constituents listed hereon as natural to the poppy are likely in trace quantities, why should Dilaudid be omitted because we make it synthetically from a natural base of another constituent molecule, the fact remains it does exist as natural by itself as per evidence, isn't this reasoning correct for what should be included as natural? Nagelfar (talk) 18:19, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hydromorphone / Dilaudid, natural not semi-synthetic? 

message: I'm not one to remove the delineation of all real instances of potential opiate article links on a template meant to be an exhaustive list of such. Especially on a website wiki which is most likely to have an eventual informed/informative article on the individual instances as subjects. Though there should be some way to bundle the red-links as invisible until they are blue links. I wish there was a <invisiblered>type command</invisiblered>, (like the "nowiki" command) that made the words in-between  completely vanish until the article is created or made into a redirect. Maybe someone should suggest such in the proper area, and then add such commands to the 'halogenated morphine derivatives' section. Though I don't think such should be made for all red links in such lists, for they inspire one to create such an article, but in big exhaustive areas such as the whole section where minor instances are not simply being filled in, but rather the majority of such are lacking, I think should be the extenuating circumstance for which such a command would be well used. Nagelfar (talk) 06:39, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Halogenated Morphine Derivatives 

message: If someone could remake this image of Oxymorphone-3-methoxynaltrexonazine free GNU (or et cetra) for Wikipedia, it would be a great maintenance of notoriety for the vastly different yet similar morphinan conformations that due to mechanism work in the opposing fashion (in terms of agonism / antagonism, which are to contradict myself here actual quite similar functions in method of action if not result on a body's ecology/ecosystem to use grossly misguided terms of another field). I think this is notable if just to pair it with an example that the bulky multiplied molecular form of Naloxonazine has a twin that doesn't necessitate such a double form being at all times ever an antagonist but a full agonist too. Nagelfar (talk) 00:18, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Naloxonazine]] has a mate for a pair in [http://i.imgur.com/1xs8v.png Oxymorphone-3-methoxynaltrexonazine] 

message: In case a good reference point is needed for what opioids could be added to Wikipedia, the following "red links" were removed from a version of this template hence. Nagelfar (talk) 02:15, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The red links are still in List of opioids. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 06:34, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Red links removed. 

message: I've noticed multiple articles specifically on combined formulations of opioids used in pharmaceutical medicine. Namely Hydrocodone/paracetamol, Hydrocodone/ibuprofen, Oxycodone/paracetamol, Oxycodone/naloxone, Morphine/naltrexone & Fentanyl/fluanisone. (I could think of Oxycodone/aspirin (Percodan) & Oxycodone/ibuprofen (Combunox) as well). Might there be a manner for integrating these variations into a template exclusively for 'opiate pharmaceutical preparations'? This would likely exclude, and take up, the entire opium segment of this template from here (with the articles such as Laudanum being more similar to the above than to individual molecular entities, such as most the entries in 'opioids' really are.). Nagelfar (talk) 19:52, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inclusion of articles of combined preparations? 

message: I removed Ethanol from the list. Because Ethanol is not an opioid. Am I wrong?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.123.227.9 (talk) 21:41, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethanol 

message: I note that Medgirl131 is currently replacing template:Opioids across relevant articles with Template:Opioidergics, created by her, apparently without any discussion with others. Is there any consensus for the implementation of this new template? Medgirl131 undid my reversion 618386506 of her change to Opium with the comment  "Template:Opioids will be deprecated in favor of Template:Opioidergics and List of opioids shortly. Sorry for the confusion. Thanks."  However I see no record of discussion of this initiative anywhere on WP. Plantsurfer (talk) 08:52, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is there consensus in favour of [[Template:Opioidergics]]??