#41

There is a scaling law for translating doses from mice to men. I forget the details but I think it is based on surface area (I don’t know why!). In any case, it is NOT based on a direct ratio of mass. You can look into it. Your calculation is off by at least an order of magnitude.

#42

if let L be the linear distance ratio then the exponent is between 2 and 3 and it comes from fractal theory and it’s not just mice to men but in general for any 2 bodies of same shape. Assuming same shape and density if the exponent was 2 it would be by ratio of surface area and if it were 3 it would obviously be by mass ratio.I forgot exactly what it is also but i know it is more than 2 and less than 3. Ofcourse mice and men are not same shape but still assume it’s close enough to use the formula. It is NOT by surface area and my calculation is NOT off by any order of magnitude… Some run of the mill approximate formulas given in the literature are mouse/12.3 , rat/6.2, rabbit /3.1, dog/1.8 , mini-pig/1.1. Ofcourse they are not exact because it depends upon the exact size and weight of the particular animal So u are WRONG. If i just used surface area then i get a multiplying factor of float((70000/20)^(2/3))=230.5 whereas i used a factor
of 70000/20/12.3=284.6 not much difference though ofcourse using the exponent of just 2 for surface area ratios results in too small a factor so assume the exponent is 9/4 which is greater than 2 and less than 3 so get
float((70000/20)^(3/4))=455 which results in a larger dose for humans than i got by dividing by 10 or 12.3.and likely closer to the correct extrapolation for 70kg person vs 20g mouse because as i recall from theory of fractals that exponent was greater than 2.25.

#43

Here is the document I’ve seen most often referenced for mouse to human dosing translations:

Based on the FDA animal to human dosing conversion guide here.

2 Likes
#44

OK, I have been wrong before. I was trying to be helpful; I was not trying to offend. I guess it came across poorly. My apologies.

1 Like