This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Azithromycin article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
Archives:
1Auto-archiving period: 90 days
![]() |
![]() | 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 Azithromycin.
|
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
COVID-19, broadly construed, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
I recently paid $3.00 for six 250 mg pills at a small-town pharmacy in the rural USA. John G Hasler ( talk) 17:04, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
The source stating azithromycin is effective against COVID-19 references an article in Int J Antimicrob Agents that doesn't actually exist. See DOI link here, says not found. I've never heard of "Mediterranee Infection". Are we sure this is a reliable source? 142.79.198.243 ( talk) 17:31, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
Doc James The ClinCalc data for 2017 show around 12 million prescriptions for azithromycin and the CDC data show around 42 million outpatient prescriptions. Can the ClinCalc data be trusted? We use it for prescription counts for many articles.
Previous year counts from the CDC for outpatient prescriptions show 52M (2011), 53M (2012), 47M (2013), 45M (2014), 46M (2015), 44M (2016) and they are also much higher than the counts shown in the ClinCalc data.
https://clincalc.com/DrugStats/Top300Drugs.aspx
https://clincalc.com/DrugStats/Drugs/Azithromycin
Whywhenwhohow ( talk) 04:25, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
@ Doc James: as busy as you are this is not very critical, but given the protected status of the article, I can only ask. (If you want to lift the protection, I for one would watch and protect from vandalism.
My observation—the appearing ref [6] Fischer, Jnos; Ganellin, C. Robin (2006). Analogue-based Drug Discovery. John Wiley & Sons. p. 498. ISBN 9783527607495, is misrepresented. The citation is to a table that only provides the structure of the drug, and no historical information on its discovery. That makes the very detailed material appearing before it subject to a {{cn|date = March 2020}}{{OR|date = March 20202}} tag. As well, when doing this edit, note, in that sentence,
the amount of information looks susiciously like non-independent OR/editorializing from persons with a vested interest in recognition. At the very least, the "Dr." should come out, and the list of co-discoverers should go into a footnote, at least until it is supported by citation. In short, any discovery needs specific third-party sourcing from more than one secondary source, and this statement fails the test. I would leave it in bulk, but it needs to be reduced in detail, and it needs reliable sources. Sorry, the "le prof" in me gets angry about such scholarly sloppiness. Cheers. 2601:246:C700:19D:18DE:22D5:EC7B:7892 ( talk) 19:16, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
Why do you keep removing that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by It is I, Marija, a humble thief ( talk • contribs) 16:49, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
This is the history section of Viagra. It lists the location of where it was invented and gives the actual name of the researcher, so why can't we have the same thing? The editing on Wikipedia is not consistent and that's what pisses me off about this - if every history section removed the country I'd be ok with it, but no, all the Western country ones have stayed behind.
History
Sildenafil (compound UK-92,480) was synthesized by a group of pharmaceutical chemists working at Pfizer's Sandwich, Kent, research facility in England. It was initially studied for use in hypertension (high blood pressure) and angina pectoris (a symptom of ischaemic heart disease). The first clinical trials were conducted in Morriston Hospital in Swansea.[46] Phase I clinical trials under the direction of Ian Osterloh suggested the drug had little effect on angina, but it could induce marked penile erections.[47][48] — Preceding unsigned comment added by It is I, Marija, a humble thief ( talk • contribs) 17:21, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
EDIT AGAIN
I'm re-adding the history of it, because the history of Viagra is still there, so either remove both histories or keep ours. — Preceding unsigned comment added by It is I, Marija, a humble thief ( talk • contribs) 21:21, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
EDIT AGAIN JUNE 25TH, 2020
I'm re-adding the history with a reference. Someone removed it again for "not having a reference". I think I made a mistake in the reference though because it's missing a "title" and I'm not sure how to add that. The reference does provide a link to a website, so if someone wants to add a "title", please do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by It is I, Marija, a humble thief ( talk • contribs) 22:51, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
In keeping with Wikipedia's naming standards, in 1980, Pliva was a Yugoslavian state-operated pharmaceutical company. Historiaantiqua ( talk) 05:30, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
In Australia, it is also used as the antibiotic of choice to treat Whooping Cough and mycoplasma infections in children. 2001:8003:E40F:9601:F020:3645:C8DA:5253 ( talk) 11:10, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Azithromycin article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
Archives:
1Auto-archiving period: 90 days
![]() |
![]() | 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 Azithromycin.
|
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to
COVID-19, broadly construed, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
I recently paid $3.00 for six 250 mg pills at a small-town pharmacy in the rural USA. John G Hasler ( talk) 17:04, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
The source stating azithromycin is effective against COVID-19 references an article in Int J Antimicrob Agents that doesn't actually exist. See DOI link here, says not found. I've never heard of "Mediterranee Infection". Are we sure this is a reliable source? 142.79.198.243 ( talk) 17:31, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
Doc James The ClinCalc data for 2017 show around 12 million prescriptions for azithromycin and the CDC data show around 42 million outpatient prescriptions. Can the ClinCalc data be trusted? We use it for prescription counts for many articles.
Previous year counts from the CDC for outpatient prescriptions show 52M (2011), 53M (2012), 47M (2013), 45M (2014), 46M (2015), 44M (2016) and they are also much higher than the counts shown in the ClinCalc data.
https://clincalc.com/DrugStats/Top300Drugs.aspx
https://clincalc.com/DrugStats/Drugs/Azithromycin
Whywhenwhohow ( talk) 04:25, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
@ Doc James: as busy as you are this is not very critical, but given the protected status of the article, I can only ask. (If you want to lift the protection, I for one would watch and protect from vandalism.
My observation—the appearing ref [6] Fischer, Jnos; Ganellin, C. Robin (2006). Analogue-based Drug Discovery. John Wiley & Sons. p. 498. ISBN 9783527607495, is misrepresented. The citation is to a table that only provides the structure of the drug, and no historical information on its discovery. That makes the very detailed material appearing before it subject to a {{cn|date = March 2020}}{{OR|date = March 20202}} tag. As well, when doing this edit, note, in that sentence,
the amount of information looks susiciously like non-independent OR/editorializing from persons with a vested interest in recognition. At the very least, the "Dr." should come out, and the list of co-discoverers should go into a footnote, at least until it is supported by citation. In short, any discovery needs specific third-party sourcing from more than one secondary source, and this statement fails the test. I would leave it in bulk, but it needs to be reduced in detail, and it needs reliable sources. Sorry, the "le prof" in me gets angry about such scholarly sloppiness. Cheers. 2601:246:C700:19D:18DE:22D5:EC7B:7892 ( talk) 19:16, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
Why do you keep removing that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by It is I, Marija, a humble thief ( talk • contribs) 16:49, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
This is the history section of Viagra. It lists the location of where it was invented and gives the actual name of the researcher, so why can't we have the same thing? The editing on Wikipedia is not consistent and that's what pisses me off about this - if every history section removed the country I'd be ok with it, but no, all the Western country ones have stayed behind.
History
Sildenafil (compound UK-92,480) was synthesized by a group of pharmaceutical chemists working at Pfizer's Sandwich, Kent, research facility in England. It was initially studied for use in hypertension (high blood pressure) and angina pectoris (a symptom of ischaemic heart disease). The first clinical trials were conducted in Morriston Hospital in Swansea.[46] Phase I clinical trials under the direction of Ian Osterloh suggested the drug had little effect on angina, but it could induce marked penile erections.[47][48] — Preceding unsigned comment added by It is I, Marija, a humble thief ( talk • contribs) 17:21, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
EDIT AGAIN
I'm re-adding the history of it, because the history of Viagra is still there, so either remove both histories or keep ours. — Preceding unsigned comment added by It is I, Marija, a humble thief ( talk • contribs) 21:21, 21 June 2020 (UTC)
EDIT AGAIN JUNE 25TH, 2020
I'm re-adding the history with a reference. Someone removed it again for "not having a reference". I think I made a mistake in the reference though because it's missing a "title" and I'm not sure how to add that. The reference does provide a link to a website, so if someone wants to add a "title", please do so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by It is I, Marija, a humble thief ( talk • contribs) 22:51, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
In keeping with Wikipedia's naming standards, in 1980, Pliva was a Yugoslavian state-operated pharmaceutical company. Historiaantiqua ( talk) 05:30, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
In Australia, it is also used as the antibiotic of choice to treat Whooping Cough and mycoplasma infections in children. 2001:8003:E40F:9601:F020:3645:C8DA:5253 ( talk) 11:10, 12 June 2024 (UTC)