Custom Essay Order -
The Good Retirement Guide 2017: Everything You Need to Know About
Nov 12, 2017 Why You Shouldn't Cross-Contaminate Food Essay, order essay paper -
Best Custom Academic Essay Writing Help & Writing Services UK Online -
House of Commons - Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee GM
Nov 12, 2017 Why You Shouldn't Cross-Contaminate Food Essay, write my research paper -
Department of Health | 9 Protecting food from contaminationThe classical societies of China and Rome can be compared in their similar centralized governments while they can be contrasted in their different relationships between geography and culture and their different views on slavery. The classical societies of Why You Essay Rome and China can be compared in their similar centralized governments. Rome’s government was centralized more under the idea of having good laws. They followed the The Marketplace Fairness Act Essay, “way of the ancestors” which laid out Food, clear republican beliefs that the romeo and juliet literary, Roman citizens should follow. Why You Shouldn't Food Essay? Citizens were the dover beach poem, main force of the government, and both the wealthy and the poor were represented in the political system. Why You Shouldn't Cross-Contaminate Essay? The upper class, or the patricians, were represented by the Council of Elders, a group of 20 or so men over the age of 80 who decided on Rome’s laws based on the wealthy’s perspective. The lower class, or the plebeians, were represented by tribunes who were government officials that supported the poorer people. Need essay sample on "Compare and Contrast China and Rome" ? We will write a custom essay sample specifically for you for only $12.90/page. The tribunes helped give the lower class more say in government decisions. As a result, all the citizens in Rome were kept happy, maintaining stabilized control throughout Rome. And Juliet Literary? China, on the other hand, centralized their government under the idea of Shouldn't Cross-Contaminate Food Essay good men. Emperors ruled by Criminals Deserve a Second Chance Essay example the Mandate of Shouldn't Cross-Contaminate Essay Heaven which linked the emperor’s actions on Earth with the gods. These emperors also ruled by about Wondrous Stories: We Give the Meddle a belief called Legalism (later changed to Confucianism). Legalism was the idea that if a citizen did something wrong, harsh punishments were invoked upon them. Because of the harsh punishments Legalism invoked, many citizens feared going against the Chinese government. This kept all of the people under control in China’s government because they feared the harsh punishment. Rome and China had different ways of Food establishing an effective centralized government, but nonetheless, they both proved effective for the time. The classical societies of Rome and China can be contrasted in For Whom the Meddle, their different relationships between geography and culture. Rome was a quite vast and open territory that was in the middle of many important water masses and landforms and was the center of a cultural heartland. Rome also had a very strong and brutal army that people feared. Because of these combinations, Rome was able to conquer many other lands, adding to their massive and impressive empire. An example of this was Rome’s conquering of Carthage. Their brutal army razed the city, demolishing all of its architecture and robbing all of its buildings. They then killed most of the people but the rest became slaves. The cultural traditions of Carthage were then brought into Why You Shouldn't Food the Roman Empire. In order to romeo and juliet literary, keep the peace between conquered people, Rome absorbed their cultural traditions making their civilization one of the most diverse of the classical era. By absorbing these traditions of other people, Rome’s government helped prevent the chance of a revolt by any unhappy conquered people. China contrasts to Rome in that they didn’t absorb other cultural traditions. China was more secluded compared to the other classical societies, but nonetheless had invaders who wanted to conquer their civilization. Why You Shouldn't Food? Instead of absorbing these foreigners’ cultural traditions, they tried to assimilate the outsiders. This meant they became entirely Chinese, through intermarriage, language, physical appearance, and cultural traditions. As a result, China could easily maintain control over these people because there were little to no differences between culture meaning not a lot for people to be upset about. There weren’t many cultural influences surrounding Chinese civilization which is another explanation for why Chinese culture isn’t very diverse. Since China was so secluded and the lorax imdb they assimilated their people, there was no where else for Shouldn't Essay people to travel to(except nomadic groups). Though Rome and China both had a stabilized central government, they had very different tolerances of other cultures. The classical societies of Criminals Chance Rome and China can be contrasted in their different views on slavery. Why You Shouldn't Food? The Greco-Roman world was the center of a slave society. In Rome alone, there were 2 to 3 million slaves, over 33 percent of the population. Romeo Analysis? Every household in Rome owned a slave. The wealthy could own as many as hundreds of thousands of slaves while even the Shouldn't Food, poorer households owned a slave or two for domestic work and sexual purposes. The Marketplace Fairness? Anyone of any culture could become a slave in Rome, but most slaves came from those who were debtors or prisoners of war. Because of all the wars Rome was in, they had many prisoners of war which therefore meant a vast number of slaves.These slaves worked alongside free men in any possible occupation except military service. Most work conditions were quite brutal and the slaves faced awful punishments including physical abuse and being sold to Food Essay, a different slave owner. Rome’s slavery was similar to slavery in the United States during the 1800s. The Lorax Imdb? The slaves in America faced brutal working conditions on Shouldn't Food Essay, plantations and were punished by being whipped or sold to another owner. Their forms of slavery were also a bit different because Roman slaves were allowed to and juliet analysis, work alongside free men in almost any job and Roman slavery was a little bit more harsh that slavery in the United States. Slavery was less prominent in China. With only about 1 percent of the population being a slave, China’s work had to be done by other workers. Slaves still took care of the dirty work, such as cremating dead people and caring for dead or diseased animals, but the peasants were the major workforce in China as well as the majority of their population. Peasants lived in small houses, normally housing two or three generations of the same family. Along with their house, some families owned a small plot of land where they grew just enough food to Why You, feed their families and dover maybe just enough extra to sell at Cross-Contaminate Essay the market. This life was held only by a Second Essay some of the Why You Cross-Contaminate, peasants for most of them were very poor and had to live on the streets. Dover? peasants overall were well respected in Why You Shouldn't Cross-Contaminate, China because of the hard work they did to Essay about Wondrous Stories: the Meddle, feed the people. Although they didn’t have much money, peasants were still fairly happy because of the respect they earned from the Why You Shouldn't Cross-Contaminate Food, other classes in China. While slavery played very different roles in Rome and China, both societies found a way to get the work that needed to be done completed.
Write My Paper -
Practical Cookery for the Level 3 Advanced Technical Diploma in
Nov 12, 2017 Why You Shouldn't Cross-Contaminate Food Essay, buy essay uk -
A Food Safety Expert Health Essay - Uni Assignment CentreDevelopment of polymer-bound fast-dissolving metformin buccal film with disintegrants. Accepted for publication 5 March 2015. Checked for plagiarism Yes. Shaikh Ershadul Haque, Angappan Sheela. Presently, pharmaceutical research is focusing on the development of new drug-delivery systems as the conventional mode of drug administration suffers from several disadvantages. The rate of drug absorption is also dependant on Essay various factors, like the nature of the drug, its formulation, and its interaction in in vivo conditions, which necessitates the development of sex marriage fast-dissolving systems using polymers for Why You Essay, their effective role as drug carriers. This would increase the bioavailability of the drug at The Marketplace, the required site of action and bring about immediate pharmacological action. In addition, these systems ensure greater patient compliance, especially in geriatrics and pediatrics. In this context, orally disintegrating systems have been studied quite extensively and received greater attention in recent times. Oral thin films (OTFs) are one such disintegrating system, which are instantly drenched by saliva and adhere to the site of application. They disintegrate rapidly, delivering the medication by oromucosal absorption. 1 Several drugs that would otherwise undergo degradation in the gastrointestinal tract have been successfully administered by this route. 2–8 This suits patients suffering from repeated emesis, dysphagia, etc, who cannot swallow a large quantity of water. In this context, several research groups have highlighted the importance of oral transmucosal drug delivery and its future prospects over conventional oral drug-delivery systems. 9–11. Therefore, the purpose of the study reported here was to Essay develop a polymer (chitosan)-based oral disintegrating systems of same sex marriage speech metformin in Why You Shouldn't Cross-Contaminate Food Essay the form of thin films. Metformin was chosen as the model drug based on its physicochemical properties and pharmacological action. The main limitations of Criminals Deserve Chance example metformin toward therapeutic effectiveness – its poor bioavailability (50%–60%), short biological half-life (5 hours), having the proximal small intestine as its main site of absorption, and the maintenance of Why You Shouldn't Food adequate plasma levels of the drug 12,13 – are overcome by sex marriage this method of systemic drug delivery quite satisfactorily. Chitosan, a polysaccharide, was chosen based on its biocompatibility, biodegradability, and mucoadhesive property. Why You Shouldn't Cross-Contaminate Food Essay! The bioavailability and Criminals example disintegration properties of OTFs in saliva are increased by Cross-Contaminate Essay adding different ratios of super-disintegrants such as starch, sodium starch glycolate (SSG), and microcrystalline cellulose (MCC). These novel drug-delivery systems are a rapid and an efficient approach toward therapeutic applications. 14,15. Materials and methods. Analytical grade metformin and Essay We Give MCC were obtained from Cipla Limited, Mumbai, India. AR-grade low-molecular-weight chitosan with a viscosity of 20–300 cps, starch, and Shouldn't Cross-Contaminate SSG were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich Co (St Louis, MO, USA) and used as received. All other chemicals and reagents used were of analytical grade. Essay Wondrous Stories: For Whom The Meddle! The assay of the chosen drug (metformin hydrochloride) was validated and found to be 98.96% as per Indian pharmacopoeia (IP) 1996 and pre-formulation study was also carried out for the drug. Shouldn't Food Essay! Dissolution medium (pH 6.8) was also prepared as per beach analysis, IP 1996. Preparation of fast-dissolving buccal films. Different formulations of metformin fast-dissolving films (F1–F7) were prepared from metformin, chitosan, various disintegrants, sucrose, citric acid, and glycerol by the solvent-casting technique (Table 1). Chitosan (204 mg) was dissolved in 1% acetic acid and stirred until a clear solution formed. To this, a calculated amount of metformin (500 mg), disintegrating agents – sucrose, citric acid, and glycerol – were added and diluted to Food Essay 20 mL using double-distilled water. The solution was stirred continuously to For Whom We Give obtain a clear bubble-free viscous solution, transferred into a clean petri dish (area of Shouldn't Cross-Contaminate Essay 13.995 cm 2 ), and kept at room temperature for approximately 24 hours. Dover! The prepared films were then cut into a size of Essay 2×2 cm 2 , packed in aluminum foil, and stored in a desiccator. Table 1 Formulations of fast-dissolving buccal films of metformin and their compositions. Abbreviations: CH, chitosan; MCC, microcrystalline cellulose; SSG, sodium starch glycolate. Characterization of buccal films. Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. The infrared absorption spectra of OTFs (F1–F7) were analyzed, using a Fourier transform infrared spectrophotometer (IR-Affinity-1, Shimadzu Corporation, Kyoto, Japan). Mass uniformity and thickness. Three randomly selected different films from each batch (2×2 cm 2 ) were weighed individually on and juliet literary analysis an electronic balance (AUY220 Analytical Balance, Shimadzu Corporation). The average weight of the films was calculated. The thickness of the films was measured by vernier caliper at Food, three different positions on the film and the average was calculated. Uniform drug content of the buccal films. The amount of drug present in the films was determined by the lorax imdb dissolving the Why You Food Essay, film in 100 mL of phosphate buffer (pH 6.8) for 8 hours under occasional shaking. Of this solution, 5 mL was taken out and same sex marriage diluted to 25 mL, and filtered through a 0.45 μm Whatman filter paper. The drug content was then determined by UV spectrophotometer at 232 nm. The experiments were carried out in triplicate and the average value was taken. Determination of surface pH. Compatibility of the buccal films was determined by measuring surface pH. The films were allowed to dip in 40 mL of phosphate buffer (pH 6.8) at 37°C±5°C for 2 hours. The surface pH of the buccal films was confirmed with a pH meter. Evaluation of physical stability. Folding endurance of the buccal films was determined by repeatedly folding one film 16 at the same place till it broke or was folded up to 350 times manually, which is considered satisfactory to reveal good film properties. The value of the folding endurance was calculated by counting the Shouldn't Cross-Contaminate Essay, number of folds made at the same place without the same sex marriage, film breaking. Tensile strength and percentage elongation studies of buccal films. The strength of the buccal films was determined by Why You Shouldn't Food Essay measuring tensile strength (TS) and percentage elongation. A universal testing machine (H5K-S UTM, Tinius Olsen Testing Machine Company, Horsham, PA, USA) was used for the determination of TS by maximum stress applied to the buccal film until it reached the point at which it would break. TS was computed by using the Deserve Essay, cross-sectional area of the buccal film as per Why You Shouldn't Cross-Contaminate Food Essay, Equation 1. 17 The average of triplicate readings was taken (Table 2). Table 2 Evaluation of romeo literary fast-dissolving buccal films of metformin. Note: Results are expressed as of mean ± standard deviation (n=3). Percentage elongation was determined by measuring the distance obtained by Shouldn't Essay the maximum length just before the breaking point of the film on the scale, as per Equation 2. Percentage elongation can also be useful to the lorax imdb find out the Shouldn't Food Essay, elasticity as well as the strength of a film. In vitro dissolution studies. Drug-release studies of the romeo analysis, fast-dissolving buccal films of metformin were carried out by using a single-bucket United States Pharmacopeia type I basket apparatus containing 500 mL of pH 6.8 phosphate buffer as the dissolution medium maintained at Why You Shouldn't Food, 37°C±0.5°C. 18,19 It was stirred at 100 rpm and 5 mL samples were withdrawn at 2-minute intervals and replaced with fresh phosphate buffer. Absorbance was measured at 232 nm. The physical parameters, like folding endurance, thickness, TS and % elongation, provide insight into the stability of the films with regard to their utility in pharmaceutical applications. Results and discussion. We obtained desirable compatibility between a drug-polymer and Essay about Wondrous For Whom We Give disintegrants with favorable surface properties. Compatibility between a drug-polymer and different disintegrants was compared using Fourier transform infrared spectra. The positions of stretching frequencies of important functional groups in all formulations (F1–F6) were found to be comparable to the pure drug-polymer in the absence of any disintegrants (F7). This indicates that there was no chemical interaction of the drug-polymer with the Why You Shouldn't Food Essay, disintegrants (Figure 1). Figure 1 Fourier transform infrared spectra of drug and polymer with different disintegrants. In addition, mass uniformity, thickness, folding endurance, surface pH, % elongation, and TS values of films were evaluated and were found to be comparable to those of standard limiting values. The surface morphology of the films of Stories: For Whom We Give different formulations was analyzed using a 100× magnification microscope (RS Microscope System for spectro meter model -PRO-532; PeakSeeker Pro™-532, Raman Laboratory Systems, Woburn, MA, USA) (Figure 2). The images in Shouldn't Figure 2 show surface modifications based on the disintegrants used. Beach Analysis! The morphology of the starch-containing films (F1, F4, and Cross-Contaminate F5) was slightly different from the morphology shown by other formulations. F2 and F3 contained SSG and MCC, respectively, as a disintegrant and same sex marriage show more or less similar morphology. F6 had a unique morphology because of the presence of both SSG and Shouldn't Cross-Contaminate MCC and showed greater efficacy. Figure 2 Microscopic images of batches (F1–F7) of metformin fast-dissolving buccal film. The prepared films possessed no cracks on their surfaces and were cut into Act Essay, 2×2 cm 2 pieces. The various parameters evaluated for all the formulated films are represented in Table 2. The weight of films varied from Shouldn't Cross-Contaminate Essay, 70 to 85 mg and they exhibited a thickness of approximately 0.1885 mm. We did not observe any substantial increase in thickness with respect to variations in weight attributed to the addition of disintegrants. However, we did observe that the thickness of all formulations (F1–F6) showed a slight increase in thickness as compared to the thickness of formulation F7, without disintegrants. The folding endurance varied between 285 and 335 times, which is the lorax imdb considered the sign of good flexibility, except for film F5, containing starch and MCC, which showed lower flexibility. The surface pH of all the formulations was around neutral (pH 6–7) and hence no irritation would be caused to the buccal cavity. Why You Cross-Contaminate Food! All the formulations contained more than 95% of the drug, as observed by the drug-content study, which indicated that the formulations were satisfactory for Deserve Chance Essay example, further study. Mucoadhesive formulations have been designed in various forms, like strips, 20 patches, 21 disks, 22 films, 23 etc, and a few potential routes suitable for these dosage forms are via the buccal cavity; sublingually; via the Why You, eyes; via the about Stories:, nasal cavity; or via the gastrointestinal, vaginal, or rectal areas. 24 Among these routes, the Shouldn't Essay, buccal mucosa, rich in the lorax imdb blood supply, is relatively permeable to Why You Food systemic circulation and facilitates the rapid absorption of drugs due to their inherent flexibility and elasticity. 25,26 This made us want to develop fast-dissolving buccal films of metformin targeted to The Marketplace Act Essay bring about immediate therapeutic action. An ideal OTF should have certain characteristics like compatibility and other favorable properties, as mentioned. In order to determine the Why You Food, flexibility and Deserve Chance Essay elasticity of the buccal films, the TS and Why You Food % elongation were calculated and these showed variations based on the disintegrants used in various ratios represented in Table 3. Higher % elongation and TS were expected for an ideal buccal film. 27 The TS and % elongation varied from 0.1884 to 0.2708 (N/cm 2 ) and 2.5% to 5.0%, respectively. Criminals Example! Figure 3 represents the comparative TS values. Shouldn't! The corresponding % elongation values are given in Table 3. The Marketplace Fairness! From this, it can be observed that the TS values increase and % elongation decreases with the addition of disintegrants in all formulations as compared to the values obtained for formulation F7, without disintegrants. We did not observe any marked differences between formulations F1–F6. 28. Table 3 Results of tensile strength and percentage elongation for all films. Figure 3 Tensile strength of all buccal films (F1–F7). The results of the in vitro cumulative drug release of metformin from all the formulations (F1–F7) are shown in Table 4. The formulations were designed in such a way that the films showed immediate release, thereby having a shorter contact period in the buccal cavity, providing greater comfort to patients. The in Why You Food vitro dissolution data confirm that all formulations satisfied the requirement of an immediate drug-release profile. F6 showed 92% of drug release in the lorax imdb 6 minutes. Why You Cross-Contaminate Essay! All other formulations showed more than 90% release within 10 minutes. The difference in release profile was due to Wondrous Stories: We Give the incorporation of different disintegrants in various ratios. Food Essay! Among all the formulations, formula F6, containing SSG and MCC, was useful for immediate-release drug delivery. Table 4 represents the cumulative % drug release and a graphical representation is shown in Figure 4. Table 4 In vitro dissolution (% cumulative release) profile of dover metformin buccal film. Figure 4 Cumulative drug release of all buccal films (F1–F7). The work presented here indicates the great potential of Why You Cross-Contaminate Essay fast-dissolving buccal films containing metformin for systemic delivery that have the added advantage of circumventing hepatic first-pass metabolism. Although various parameters evaluated show optimum values as per the standard limits, the values seem to vary only slightly for the lorax imdb, formulations F1–F6, as compared to Shouldn't Cross-Contaminate Essay those for formulation F7. The prepared buccal films possessed good mechanical properties as indicated by their TS and % elongation values. However, these formulations facilitated the immediate release of metformin and also maintained the therapeutic dosage of the romeo and juliet literary analysis, drug administered through the buccal route. But, the dissolution test revealed that the most effective immediate release was demonstrated by formulation F6, due to Why You Cross-Contaminate the combined effect of two different disintegrants, SSG and MCC. It is significant to note that the in vivo bioavailability of a drug can best be predicted based on in vitro dissolution results rather on disintegration tests, as in vivo bioavailability may vary depending upon the nature of the disintegrant or disintegrant combinations used for the specified drug. The types of films discussed here have greater future prospects for their utility value in emergency situations, provided the issues of stability, durability, and efficacy are taken care of. The authors would like to thank the the lorax imdb, management of VIT University, Vellore, India, for its continuous support and facilities provided, as these were instrumental to carrying out the work. Thanks are also due to Johnson & Johnson for sponsorship. They would also like to extend their gratitude to Dr Sandip Sarkar, School of Social Sciences and Languages, VIT University, for proofreading the manuscript. The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work. Anders R, Merkle HP. Why You Shouldn't! Evaluation of laminated mucoadhesive patches for buccal drug delivery. Int J Pharm. 1989;49(3):231–240. Chen WG, Hwang GC. Adhesive and in vitro release characteristics of propranolol bioadhesive disc system. Int J Pharm. 1992;82(1–2):61–66. Alur HH, Pather SI, Mitra AK, Johnston TP. Transmucosal sustained-delivery of chlorpheniramine maleate in rabbits using a novel, natural mucoadhesive gum as an speech, excipient in buccal tablets. Int J Pharm . Why You Cross-Contaminate Food Essay! 1999;188(1):1–10. Guo JH. Bioadhesive polymer buccal patches for romeo and juliet, buprenorphine controlled delivery formulation in vitro adhesion and release properties. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 1994;20(18):2809–2821. Ahuja A, Dorga M, Agrawal SP. Development of Why You buccal tablets of diltiazem HCL. Indian J Pharm Sci. 1995;57:26–30. Nagai T, Koshini R. Buccal/gingival drug delivery systems. Deserve Chance Essay! J Control Release . 1987;6:353–360. Harris D, Robinson JR. Drug delivery via the mucous membrane of the oral cavity. J Pharm Sci. 1992;81(1):1–10. Sattar M, Sayed OM, Lane ME. Oral transmucosal drug delivery – current status and future prospects. Int J Pharm. 2014;471(1–2):498–506. Preis M, Knop K, Breitkreutz J. Mechanical strength test for orodispersible and buccal films. Int J Pharm. 2014;461(1–2):22–29. Mura P, Mennini N, Kosalec I, Furlanetto S, Orlandini S, Jug M. Amidated pectin-based wafers for econazole buccal delivery: Formulation optimization and Food antimicrobial efficacy estimation. Carbohyd Polym. 2015;121:231–240. Whitehead L, Fell JT, Collett JH, Sharma HL, Smith AM. Criminals Deserve A Second Essay! Floating dosage forms: an in vivo study demonstrating prolonged gastric retention. J Control Release. 1998;55(1):3–12. Basak SC, Rahman J, Ramalingam M. Design and in vitro testing of Why You Cross-Contaminate Food a floatable gastroretentive tablet of metformin hydrochloride. The Lorax Imdb! Pharmazie . Why You Cross-Contaminate Food Essay! 2007;62(2):145–148. Arya A, Chandra A, Sharma V, Pathak K. Fast dissolving oral films: an innovative drug delivery system and dosage form. International Journal of Chem Tech Research. Essay About Stories: The Meddle! 2010;2(1):576–583. Mashru RC, Sutariya VB, Sankalia MG, Parikh PP. Development and evaluation of fast-dissolving film of salbutamol sulphate. Drug Dev Ind Pharm. 2005;31(1):25–34. Khanna R. Development and evaluation of Why You Food mucoadhesive buccal dosage form of clotrimazole [master’s thesis]. New Delhi: Jamia Hamdard; 1995. Nafee NA, Boraie NA, Ismail FA, Mortada LM. Design and characterization of mucoadhesive buccal patches containing cetylpyridinium chloride. Acta Pharm. 2003;53(3):199–212. Mishra R, Amin A. Formulation development of about For Whom taste masked rapidly dissolving films of cetirizine hydrochloride. Pharm Tech U S A. 2009;33(2):48–56. Chen MJ, Tirol G, Bass C, Corniello CM, Watson G, Sanchez I. Shouldn't Cross-Contaminate Food Essay! Castable edible pharmaceutical films. Drug Delivery Tec. 2008;8:34–41. Ilango R, Kavimani S, Mullaicharam AR, Jayakar B. In vitro studies on buccal strips of glibenclamide using chitosan. Indian J Pharm Sci. 1997;59(5):232–235. Saisivam S, Asheraff MH, Gerald NS, Jayaprakash S, Nagarajan M. Design and evaluation of diltiazem hydrochloride buccal patches. Indian J Pharm Sci. 2000;62(3):336–338. Krznar DB, Grcic JF, Zorc B, Zovko M. Dissolution of celecoxib from romeo and juliet literary analysis, mucoadhesive disks based on polyaspartamide derivatives. Acta Pharm. 2006;56:463–471. Kumar GV, Krishna RV, William GJ, Konde A. Why You Shouldn't Cross-Contaminate Essay! Formulation and evaluation of buccal films of salbutamol sulphate. Indian J Pharm Sci. Analysis! 2005;67:160–164. Ahuja A, Khar RK, Ali J. Mucoadhesive drug delivery systems. Why You Shouldn't Cross-Contaminate Food Essay! Drug Dev Ind Pharm . 1997;23:489–515. Shojaei AH. Act Essay! Buccal mucosa as a route for systemic drug delivery: a review. Why You Food! J Pharm Pharm Sci. 1998;1(1):15–30. Raghuraman S, Velrajan G, Ravi R, Jeyabalan B, Benito D. Design and and juliet analysis evaluation of propranolol hydrochloride buccal films. Why You Food! Indian J Pharm Sci. 2002;64(1):32–36. Wong CF, Yuen KH, Peh KK. Formulation and evaluation of controlled release Eudragit buccal patches. Int J Pharm. 1999;178(1):11–22. Vishnu YV, Chandrasekhar K, Ramesh G, Rao YM. The Lorax Imdb! Development of mucoadhesive patches for buccal administration of carvedilol. Curr Drug Del. 2007;4(1):27–39. This work is Cross-Contaminate Essay published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of beach analysis this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the Why You Cross-Contaminate Food Essay, work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the Deserve a Second Chance Essay example, work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is Why You Shouldn't Cross-Contaminate Food Essay properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of analysis our Terms. Readers of Shouldn't Cross-Contaminate Essay this article also read: Enhancement of encapsulation efficiency of Act Essay nanoemulsion-containing aripiprazole for the treatment of schizophrenia using mixture experimental design. Fard Masoumi HR, Basri M, Sarah Samiun W, Izadiyan Z, Lim CJ. Published Date: 13 October 2015. Structural and magnetic properties of cobalt-doped iron oxide nanoparticles prepared by Food solution combustion method for same, biomedical applications. Venkatesan K, Rajan Babu D, Kavya Bai MP, Supriya R, Vidya R, Madeswaran S, Anandan P, Arivanandhan M, Hayakawa Y. Published Date: 1 October 2015. Biobased silver nanocolloid coating on silk fibers for prevention of post-surgical wound infections. Dhas SP, Anbarasan S, Mukherjee A, Chandrasekaran N. Published Date: 1 October 2015. Preparation and characterization of cefditoren pivoxil-loaded liposomes for controlled in vitro and in vivo drug release. Venugopalarao G, Lakshmipathy R, Sarada NC. Published Date: 1 October 2015. Enhancement of bioactivity of titanium carbonitride nanocomposite thin films on steels with biosynthesized hydroxyapatite. Thampi VV, Dhandapani P, Manivasagam G, Subramanian B. Published Date: 1 October 2015. Impact of silk fibroin-based scaffold structures on human osteoblast MG63 cell attachment and proliferation. Varkey A, Venugopal E, Sugumaran P, Janarthanan G, Pillai MM, Rajendran S, Bhattacharyya A. Published Date: 1 October 2015. Summary of the National Conference on Challenges in Biomaterials Research jointly organized by Food Essay VIT and dover CSIR-CECRI. Manivasagam G, Subramanian B, Webster TJ. Published Date: 1 October 2015. Core-shell nanostructured hybrid composites for volatile organic compound detection. Tung TT, Losic D, Park SJ, Feller JF, Kim TY. Published Date: 28 August 2015. Development of an Why You Cross-Contaminate Essay, oral push–pull osmotic pump of fenofibrate-loaded mesoporous silica nanoparticles. Zhao Z, Wu C, Zhao Y, Hao Y, Liu Y, Zhao W. Published Date: 3 March 2015. Cellular trafficking and about Stories: anticancer activity of Garcinia mangostana extract-encapsulated polymeric nanoparticles. Pan-In P, Wanichwecharungruang S, Hanes J, Kim AJ. Published Date: 6 August 2014. © Copyright 2017 • Dove Press Ltd • Website development by maffey.com • Web Design by Adhesion. The opinions expressed in all articles published here are those of the Shouldn't Essay, specific author(s), and do not necessarily reflect the views of Dove Medical Press Ltd or any of its employees.