![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline
Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically
review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Alendronic acid.
|
In the Pharmocokinetics section, I'm not at all sure that the sentence "Soft tissues and bones are fastly reached by about 50%" means anything. Is "fastly" even a word? I may be bold and remove it soon. Mike Field 10:36, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
The FDA site, MedlinePlus, has side-effect warnings not mentioned in this article. Not being a health professional, I hope that a competent editor will revise the article to include this info. 85.250.145.80 ( talk) 11:52, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
I have removed the litigation section because I don't think it is appropriate for the article - at least as written. Details such as naming and shaming one individual for a tactless email is hardly acceptable material for this article. Not only does it violate WP:UNDUE and WP:BLP, but it certainly comes across as if the only reason it is the article is for the purpose of carrying out some individual's grudge against a company. It is a clear case of WP:COATRACK. Maybe there is a way to appropriately incorporate some of the litigation issues associated with alendronic acid, but as currently written the paragraph is entirely unacceptable. ChemNerd ( talk) 14:52, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
Is the actual chemical the neutral bisphosphonic acid (as file:Alendronic acid.svg in the infobox) or the fully deprotonated (tetra-anionic) form (as file:Alendronate-3D-balls.png in the infobox)? The lead sentence uses the acid and the sodium-salt forms as if they were synonyms, but that doesn't make chemical sense, despite possibly being pharmacologically equivalent. I have no problem with the inclusion of both because it's a "drug" not "chemical" article, but it's confusing that things aren't self-consistent. DMacks ( talk) 07:14, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Link 8 FDA Patient Safety News, March 2008 http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/psn/transcript.cfm?show=73#3 give "Page not found" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.2.126.9 ( talk) 11:46, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Under Medical uses, should we distinguish oral from intravenous administration (since the oral bioavailability is noted as v low) and the higher/intravenous doses are used for non-osteoporosis including bone cancer, and may have different side effects ? - Rod57 ( talk) 10:26, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline
Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically
review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Alendronic acid.
|
In the Pharmocokinetics section, I'm not at all sure that the sentence "Soft tissues and bones are fastly reached by about 50%" means anything. Is "fastly" even a word? I may be bold and remove it soon. Mike Field 10:36, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
The FDA site, MedlinePlus, has side-effect warnings not mentioned in this article. Not being a health professional, I hope that a competent editor will revise the article to include this info. 85.250.145.80 ( talk) 11:52, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
I have removed the litigation section because I don't think it is appropriate for the article - at least as written. Details such as naming and shaming one individual for a tactless email is hardly acceptable material for this article. Not only does it violate WP:UNDUE and WP:BLP, but it certainly comes across as if the only reason it is the article is for the purpose of carrying out some individual's grudge against a company. It is a clear case of WP:COATRACK. Maybe there is a way to appropriately incorporate some of the litigation issues associated with alendronic acid, but as currently written the paragraph is entirely unacceptable. ChemNerd ( talk) 14:52, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
Is the actual chemical the neutral bisphosphonic acid (as file:Alendronic acid.svg in the infobox) or the fully deprotonated (tetra-anionic) form (as file:Alendronate-3D-balls.png in the infobox)? The lead sentence uses the acid and the sodium-salt forms as if they were synonyms, but that doesn't make chemical sense, despite possibly being pharmacologically equivalent. I have no problem with the inclusion of both because it's a "drug" not "chemical" article, but it's confusing that things aren't self-consistent. DMacks ( talk) 07:14, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Link 8 FDA Patient Safety News, March 2008 http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/psn/transcript.cfm?show=73#3 give "Page not found" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.2.126.9 ( talk) 11:46, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Under Medical uses, should we distinguish oral from intravenous administration (since the oral bioavailability is noted as v low) and the higher/intravenous doses are used for non-osteoporosis including bone cancer, and may have different side effects ? - Rod57 ( talk) 10:26, 4 October 2021 (UTC)