Talk:Levocetirizine

message: article has improved considerably,  should therefore not be deleted rikXL 22:40, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

message: Should this drug be genuinely considered as a third-generation antihistamine.  In effect, it's only  enantiomer, and nothing like the advance that cetirizine and other second-generation drugs were from the first-generation "sedating" antihistamines.  My feeling is that to call it "third-generation" is unjustified hype.. and, as an aside,  it's made very little impact on the marketplace.
SunnieBG 11:52, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. In fact, the Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters for Allergy and Immunology call it a second-generation antihistamine (they include fexofenadine as well). Biochemistry&Love (talk) 00:27, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Third generation ??

message: Structural formula given in the drugbox is that of an unspecified enantiomer of cetirizine; it can be used for racemic cetirizine, but not for levocetirizine, which is stereochemicaly the (R)-enantiomer (L-isomer); the correct structural formula is:
http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/7821/levocetirizinedv8.png
--84.163.87.66 10:48, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Structural formula 

message: The claim of 70% reduction in asthma events in children is not related in any way to the linked paper (footnote 2), which measures nasal and asthma symptoms in adults.  This statement needs to be supported or removed.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.126.69.183 (talk) 00:28, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. In fact, the cited research only enrolled individuals 18 years-old and older. I've removed it. Biochemistry&Love (talk) 00:08, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Research Statement unsupported by footnote 

message: This sentence is just weird. :
"The manufacturers claim it to be more effective with fewer side effects than the second-generation drugs; however, there have been no published studies supporting this assertion, although other studies have concluded it may be more effective.[1]"
Splitting up side effects and effectiveness would make it clear.
Something like :"Some studies as well as the claims of the manufacturer state it as being more effective. The manufacturer also claims it to have fewer side effects." would make it look better but I'll leave it to the main creator of the article or someone with a better grasp of English to edit the main article instead of me.
The original puts it's effectiveness as being a claim at the beginning of the sentence but by the end it's a conclusion.. 
83.101.83.96 (talk) 15:59, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Poorly constructed sentence. 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Levocetirizine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20121022184859/http://beximco-pharma.com/allergic-disorders/147-curin.html to http://www.beximco-pharma.com/allergic-disorders/147-curin.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:33, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified