Advertisement

Increase in Taste Acuity with Sympathetic Stimulation: The Relation of a Just-Noticeable Taste Difference to Systemic Psychotropic Drug Dose

  • Roland Fischer
  • Rudolf Kaelbling

Abstract

Recently we called attention to a general relationship prevailing between the taste threshold of stereospecific drugs and their biological activity [1, 2]. For example, with 1-quinine and d-quinine, as well as with d-amphetamine and 1-amphetamine, the former of each drug pair is the biologically more potent compound, as indicated by its lower oral LD50 in the mouse. Correspondingly, humans can taste the more active compound in a lower concentration (i.e., they display lower taste thresholds). For these reasons we came to regard a subject’s oral cavity as a pharmacological test preparation in situ and the taste response as a sensory expression of pharmacological activity.

Keywords

Sympathetic Stimulation Mental Patient Taste Sensitivity Drug Pair Taste Threshold 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Fischer, R., and Griffin, F.: Quinine dimorphism: A cardinal determinant of taste sensitivity, Nature (London) 200: 343, 1963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fischer, R., and Griffin, F.: Pharmacogenetic aspects of gustation, Drug Res. (Arzneimittel-Forsch.) 14: 673, 1964.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fischer, R., Knopp, W., and Griffin, F.: Taste sensitivity and the appearance of trifluoperazine-tranquilizer induced extrapyramidal symptoms, Drug Res. (Arzneimittel-Forsch.) 15: 1379, 1965.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Griffin, F.: “On the interaction of chemical stimuli with taste receptors,” Dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1966.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Harris, H., and Kalmus, H.: The measurement of taste sensitivity to phenythiourea (PTC), Ann. Eugen. (London) 15: 24, 1949.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fischer, R., Griffin, F., Archer, R. C., Zinsmeister, S.C., and Jastram, P. S.: The Weber ratio in gustatory chemoreception: an indicator of systemic (drug) reactivity, Nature (London) 207: 1049, 1965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Swets, J. A., Tanner, W. P., and Birdsall, T. G.: Decision processes in perception, in Swets, J.A.: Signal Detection and Recognition by Human Observers, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 1934, p. 3.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fisher, R.A.: The Design of Experiments, Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh, 1951, p. 11.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kimura, K.: Factors affecting the response of taste receptors of rats, Kumamoto Med. J. 14: 95, 1961.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chernetski, K. E.: Sympathetic enhancement of peripheral sensory input in the frog, J. Neurophysiol. 27: 493, 1964.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chernetski, K.E.: Facilitation of a somatic reflex by sound in Rana clamitans: Effects of sympathectomy and decerebration, Z. Tierpsychol. 7: 813, 1964.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kleiber, M.: The Fire of Life, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 1961, p. 215.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fischer, R.: Mitotic rate in organs and tissues in relation to metabolic body size (kg’s), Experientia 21: 349, 1965.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stevens, S. S.: The quantification of sensation, Daedalus 88: 606, 1959.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Brody, S.: Bioenergetics and Growth, Hafner, New York 1964, p. 352.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fischer, R.: Sex, lifespan, and smoking, Experientia 22: 178, 1966.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fischer, R., Griffin, F., and Rockey, M.A.: Gustatory chemoreception in man: Multidisciplinary aspects and perspectives, Perspectives Biol. Med. 9: 549, 1966.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press 1967

Authors and Affiliations

  • Roland Fischer
  • Rudolf Kaelbling

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations