{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03211009174311927, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 6.725663716814159, '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}}
[Evaluation of anti-seasick properties of pyrroxan and dimenhydrinate under conditions of maximal and submaximal statokinetic load in humans].

Pyrroxan and dimenhydrinate exhibit comparable anti-seasick effects in the test involving maximal and submaximal statokinetic load. Pyrroxan somewhat more significantly increases the vestibular stability, predominantly in humans with inherently high and medium stability, whereas dimenhydrinate is also effective in humans with low resistance to seasick. Pyrroxan primarily decreases the statokinetic (somatic) manifestations (dizziness, defensive movements, nystagmus), while dimenhydrinate mostly abolishes vegetative manifestations (hyperhydrosis, nausea, vomiting, fever sensation). Thus, the two drugs produce approximately equal anti-seasick action, while differing in the point of application (somatic versus vegetative).