boiphysica representative,
you still checking this thread? when i read "fluridil, a rationally designed drug", the beginning of the article discussed how the scientists chose fluridil's molecular structure. i think in one part of the article it said that they decided to put a hydrophobic end on it that way once it bonds to an androgen receptor, the hydrophobic end would keep the molecule from getting attracted back into solution, making the attachment last much longer. My question is, why would the hydrophobic end be effective if fluridil can survive in a watery solution to get to the receptor? or did I read that wrong?
you still checking this thread? when i read "fluridil, a rationally designed drug", the beginning of the article discussed how the scientists chose fluridil's molecular structure. i think in one part of the article it said that they decided to put a hydrophobic end on it that way once it bonds to an androgen receptor, the hydrophobic end would keep the molecule from getting attracted back into solution, making the attachment last much longer. My question is, why would the hydrophobic end be effective if fluridil can survive in a watery solution to get to the receptor? or did I read that wrong?