Talk:Losartan

message: Recent breakthrough: Losartan might literally cure allergies. 
TGF-beta signaling has been found the main and probably only cause of allergies.
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2013-07/jhm-jhr071813.php  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.34.126.165 (talk) 14:47, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Allergies Cure breakthrough

message: This article is in desperate need of a Side effects and countraindication section.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lordyama (talk • contribs) 03:35, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, this Rx is remarkable for having zero reported negative side effects.  But a contraindication section might be warranted. 98.82.201.24 (talk) 17:13, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Adverse Effects section

message: Hello, I posted a brief discussion of the news this week from Science Daily about the recent discovery that losartan blocks the breast cancer gene AGTR1. See: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090601182651.htm Regards.Trilobitealive (talk) 02:16, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: animal model studies for treatment of breast cancer with losartan

message: although they are related but different chemicals
http://www.sigmaaldrich.com/catalog/ProductDetail.do?lang=en&N4=61188|sial&N5=SEARCH_CONCAT_PNO|BRAND_KEY&F=SPEC
--222.64.18.236 (talk) 09:37, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please do not auto-direct Losartan potassium to this topic..... 

message: There were a few gaps and important warnings on this essential drug should be heeded. So, I did that. For now, this monograph contains enough relevant citations to back up the statements made therein.(Osterluzei (talk) 07:08, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleaned up by non-auto directive

message: My Name is Jack Keehn, and I am a 4th year medical student at the University of Central Florida College of Medicine. I am taking a WikiProject medicine course in order to further the current medical knowledge online. I plan to supplement this article with information I have learned during my medical training via my textbooks, as well as, summary articles I find online regarding the topic. This article has been graded “B” but there is still a lot I can add and contribute to the article. I thought this was an important page because it gets over 1800 views per day, and the drug “losartan” is a very common blood pressure medication. I plan on acquiring inspiration from the amphetamine wiki page which was graded as “FA” to improve this page, and hopefully we can get a better grade for the losartan page.
Pharmacology: I plan to beef up this section by providing some background information on the renin-angiotensin section in order to better understand how this drug works. I want to talk about some of the physiology and how that is related to the pharmacology.
Chemistry: I plan on adding some more information regarding the class of drugs losartan belongs to and how they are synthesized. I also want to talk about the organic chemistry a little bit in this section.
Contraindications: I’d like to add a section regarding contraindications to taking this drug.
Overdose: I’d like to add a section regarding toxicity of the drug.
Interactions: I’d like to add an interactions section to discuss which other drugs or medications should be avoided when taking losartan.
I want to help the public with understanding some information about this widely used drug, as well as, adding more references if anyone would like to read more background information. It is also my goal to avoid using “doctor speak” and to use language that mostly everyone can understand. If anyone has any objections or anything they want to add, your input would be greatly appreciated. I hope that everyone who views this page will learn something new, and I am excited to contribute to this page and the community!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by JacknowledgeMD (talk • contribs) 14:39, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: You might want to write about adverse drug effects of losartan, as that is a weakness of the current version of this wikipedia article. Overdoses are less important. My 2¢… Sbelknap (talk) 00:55, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hello! I am a 4th year medical student, participating in the WikiProject medicine, and will be editing this page for the next couple weeks. 

message: entered this edit and source which are in my opinion too weak to mention, WP:UNDUE. This report presents one case, then reviews just 6 others (Table 3) for the conclusion that losartan-induced liver injury has been reported only rarely. I don't see this as significant enough to include as encyclopedic content. --Zefr (talk) 02:16, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: It is likely the best source on the subject. The key is that it is rare which is useful information. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:32, 30 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Liver injury 

message: Hi Jack,
Thank you for your hard work editing on this article, I can see that this is a heavily trafficked page and definitely had room to make improvements.
According to your workplan, here are my impressions:
Sources: I think you did a good job at picking acceptable sources for information. Specifically, in your dosing section, you used Katzung Pharmacology. I also checked to make sure, and it is a benefit that one of your links is a pdf in which there is full access to.
Pharmacology: I think the picture you added of the mechanism of the renin angiotensin section is a wonderful picture to visualize. However, something I think that could be improved upon in this section is a word description of the mechanism of the picture. This would help others understand how the drug works. The picture is a great supplement, however I don't think should take
Adverse Effects: The sentence you added could be edited for better flow, but is useful information. For instance, you could say "Adverse outcomes do not differ among men and women, young and old, nor black and non-black patients".
Lead: Since you added a few new sections like overdose and interactions these could be included in the lead section. This would help update the overall flow of the article. Overdose: Great source, and great access to this source. Perhaps you could expand this section by explaining the symptoms in lay terms of what "low blood pressure" would look like, ie dizziness, syncope etc. This would help the readability to for the average lay person.
Your tone was balanced throughout your edits and non biased. However, I think many of the sections you added are important clinically, but take up very little of the article. I think you could expand upon them to give a better representation. Overall I think your edits were necessary and beneficial, and were well sourced.
Well done!
Tiffany Damm (talk) 03:50, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review 

message: I am sure how to fix subscripts to the empirical formula, if somebody could fix that please  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.66.251.23 (talk) 19:21, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Thanks for pointing it out. --Kwekubo (talk) 19:50, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  fix subscripts 

message: Is this a spelling error:
metahnol
It appears in the losartan article. 24.198.81.163 (talk) 12:44, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  spelling error? 

message: Just raised my doses to 50 mg morning and 50 mg evening… from 25 & 25 … curious why 2600:1005:B11D:3C14:ED02:DB12:1D43:EF3 (talk) 23:19, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the average dose per morning and evening 

message: I do not argue about losartan being "chemically described as" ..."-5-methanol". (although, shouldn't it be -5-hydroxymethyl?)(and shouldn't there be a comma after the imidazole (rather than a dash)? Pharmacists. It would be useful, and maybe preferable, to provide the *correct* IUPAC name for this chemical. Note that the structure shown is charge neutral while the "description" is of the (mono)potassium salt. It is definitely NOT clear what the actual compound is. Is the trade name used for both the neutral compound and the K (and other?) salts? I've no idea. The other problem I see with this article is the gratuitous section on "Research". Is it really noteworthy that a couple of clinical trials evaluated it in covid-19 therapy? The section was added in 2020, it is now 2023 and I found only one result which, while only 100 patients (and 100 placebo patients), showed it had no effect. There are hundreds, if not thousands of compounds which were evaluated to treat covid-19. The only notable ones, imho, would be the ones that actually showed significant benefit or things like bleach and hydroxychlorquine which were widely and incorrectly cited as "treatments" (i.e urban myths).40.142.183.146 (talk) 00:50, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Browse through the Drugs.com monograph (ref #3) to see if your questions are answered. The IUPAC name is under Identifiers in the infobox (click show). I agree with your comment on the covid research - far too preliminary and no WP:MEDRS reviews or cinical guidelines on the topic. Accordingly, I removed the section. Zefr (talk) 03:08, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name and other things