{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0593900481540931, 'fraction_numerical': 0.014446227929373997, 'mean_word_length': 5.303030303030303, '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}}
[Imidazolic H2-agonists: importance of 2-amino substitution for pharmacological activity].

The results of 2-aminohistamine (compound I) and 2-amino-5-methylhistamine (compound II) on cat acid secretion and on guinea pig gall-bladder motility are described and compared with those of Histamine or Dimaprit. The compound (I) showed a greater H2- than H1-receptor stimulating activity, while compound (II), inactive on H1, was effective on H2-receptors, being endowed with a less "potency" and "efficacy" than compound (I). The pharmacological activities of both compounds, related to their chemical structure, are discussed.