Hemoglobin and Nitric Oxide

To the Editor: The article by Schechter and Gladwin (April 10 issue) 1 is flawed by a fundamental error. The conclusions that the authors draw from reports of measured S-nitrosohemoglobin levels and decomposition rates are not disciplined by quantitative standards of efficacy: “lower” does not imply...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The New England journal of medicine 2003-07, Vol.349 (4), p.402-405
1. Verfasser: Stamler, Jonathan S
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:To the Editor: The article by Schechter and Gladwin (April 10 issue) 1 is flawed by a fundamental error. The conclusions that the authors draw from reports of measured S-nitrosohemoglobin levels and decomposition rates are not disciplined by quantitative standards of efficacy: “lower” does not imply “too low,” nor does “rapid” imply “too rapid.” The authors cite studies in which S-nitrosohemoglobin levels (approximately 50 nmol per liter) are lower than those in previous reports (micromolar levels). They fail to mention, however, that Pawloski et al. demonstrated bioactivity of red cells with S-nitrosohemoglobin at 50 nmol per liter, 2 and McMahon et al. . . .
ISSN:0028-4793
1533-4406
DOI:10.1056/NEJM200307243490419