{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.006274509803921568, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.010989010989011, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Review of chirality and its importance in pharmacology

While many pharmacologists have become increasingly aware of the importance of chirality and the role it plays in accounting for the oftentimes dramatic differences in the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of pure enantiomeric forms of therapeutic agents, there continues to be a significant lack of diligence regarding the need for properly identified stereochemicals in the scientific literature. All too frequently published reports and textbooks fail to adequately identify the stereochemical nature of the drugs utilized in a study Since the individual components of an enantiomeric pair typically have significant differences in their pharmacologic activities, the need for unambiguous descriptive nomenclature is evident. This review presents a summary of the various types of nomenclature utilized in the pharmacologic literature and their chemical bases. Several examples are described which illustrate the significant differences between enantiomeric forms of drugs and suggest possible theoretical bases for such differences. The need for continued awareness on the part of pharmacologists and the proper, unambiguous identification of stereolsomers in the scientific literature and labeling is stressed.