Talk:Rimonabant

message: Not happy with this section - "Because the drug has the opposite effects of cannabinoid receptor agonists such as tetrahydrocannabinol, which is neuroprotective against excitotoxicity,[6] it can be theorized that Rimonabant promotes the development of neurodegenerative diseases of the central nervous system such as Multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer's disease, Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), Parkinson's disease, and Huntington's disease in persons who are susceptible.[7] The reported development of previously clinically silent multiple sclerosis in one patient taking Rimonabant suggests that any patients with an underlying neurological condition should not take Rimonabant, given the neuroprotective role of the endocannabinoid system in many experimental paradigms of neurological disease."
I feel it ought to get a source that's more recent than 2002, and more accessible online, to boot. The relationship between the endocannabinoid system and Huntingdon's, vs its relationship with Alzheimer's, appear to be quite different. Note also that simply saying 'it has the opposite effects of [thc]' may be oversimplifying things. Without justifying that THC 'cures' all these ailments, you can't imply that rimonabant makes them worse. As for being opposite: yes, at the receptor, their effects are 'opposed', but who's to say what feed-foward or feedback there in the system? hard to assume that the response to stimulation or blocking of the receptor are parallel. Systems biology teaches us that's not often so. Philbradley (talk) 03:35, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Side effects section

message: I don't know how to add redirects. I read about this drug but the spelling was "Rimonobant". I searched it here and of course didn't find it. Can someone add a redirect as I don't know how. Thanks. (Dave -- Dagenham, UK)
:Done (that spelling gets a lot of Google hits!).  Just FYI, anonymous users can't make redirects since they count as new pages. --Galaxiaad 03:42, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Also added Slimona and Rimoslim redirects. Mendaliv (talk) 22:51, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Can someone add a redirect then remove this note?

message: Dear JanesDaddy and other users
The link above points to a website I have just recently created.
This website is intended to give independent information about
Rimonabant and Acomplia; the idea is to have an plattform, where users
or potential users share their ideas about the diet pill.
This page has no intention to devaluate the drug or the Sanofi-Aventis in any form!
I am putting information togehter right now and I am inviting people to help
me getting information on the page so I would appreciate your consideration
to maintain the link on this page; suggestions and feedback will be well received!
--Coladose 09:40, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: rimonabant-acomplia.de - NOT SPAM

message: Suspect same SPAMmer (24.21.40.18) as before (67.168.242.111) - BOTH COMCAST CUSTOMERS FROM OREGON, posting links to fake blogs with link SPAM and other depricated things. If you want to make a USEFUL contribution, please log in.
JanesDaddy 00:36, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Keep SPAM out of here

message: Rkwkkr:  Please note that, per WP:EL, some external links are permitted.  These include substantive links with regular updates.  Your site is not; Acomplia Resources is (it is used as a Google News feed, apparently).  Also, please refrain in the future from personal attacks.  Lastly, please sign your talk pages with four tildes.Link Spam Remover 23:20, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Personal Attacks

message: Sure, it offers some "content" but it is designed specifically to enrich its owner.  It does not appear in Google News.  Because DrPitroski has hijacked this page, he is prohibiting other sites that are more authoritative from appearing.  He even deleted the link to the official Dutch Website (http://www.rimonabant.nl)
Saying he is a "Page Hijacker" isn't a personal attack...it's just stating an obvious fact. And, I believe I have the right to dispute the "neutrality" of the External Links.  Note I didn't delete the link to the "spam website"...but people have the right to know what's going on.
Either that website should go, or other relevant content sites should be included.Rkwwkr
Apologies; your latest vandalism was not linkspam, but POV.  DrPiotroski should comment on your accusations.  And foreign language sites are not appropriate in the English version of Wikipedia.  I will ask an admin (which I am not) to look at this matter.  In the meantime, please desist.  Link Spam Remover 15:08, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "Acomplia Resources" is a "Made for AdSense" spam website

message: I'm getting tired of watching this page get hijacked by one narrow-minded intolerant poster.  In Wikipedia, EVERYONE has the right and privilege to contribute, not just one person.  If an admin doesn't step in, I will continue to fight against this page hijacking. Rkwwkr
:Jeezes guys... Its almost as if the external link section is more important than the actual article... Rkwwkr I understand your frustration but please refrain from namecalling. I think we all do what we do in good faith... I personally think this section is best kept very short! --Steven Fruitsmaak 11:35, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Admin?  Where's The Admin?

message: The article lacks some basic facts on how this molecule entered clinical development. Dabigatran and varenicline are two drugs where I've managed to trace, without much difficulty, how drug companies identified the relevant compounds. JFW | T@lk 21:10, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chemical background 

message: Is this or is this not a cannabinoid? There has been a bit of a revert war going on. Is there an expert who can positively say one way or another? -- Scjessey 21:13, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cannabinoid? 

message: This continues to be re-inserted into the page, yet it is a site designed to enrich its owner rather than provide useful information. Note the similarities, for example, between Zimulti Resources, Rimonabant Resources and Acomplia Resources. -- Scjessey 16:39, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  More on "Acomplia Resources" 

message: There is no citation for the "Reports of severe depression are frequent" claim made in the Side Effects secion. I'd like some evidence of this, someone please provide a link? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Swampfoot (talk • contribs) 19:34, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As a member of the original clinical trials in AZ, I can attest to some of the side effects. Ironically, weight loss was a side effect. The original trial was smoking cessation. Which, by the way, worked VERY well.  But, as with all things, the money to be made was in losing weight easily I suppose. 2600:1700:1609:6810:81D6:7260:C4E3:E966 (talk) 15:48, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where are the citations for Side Effects? 

message: * The section about Memory was removed. It is too speculative and there are no hints from animal experiments so far (11/2007)
* Ethanol and Cocaine addiction was merged. Rimonabant acts in both cases in the same way
* A section about the blockade of THC-effects was added
-- Panoramix303 09:30, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There are animal experiments saying that it improves memory. It makes sense for a CB1 antagonist.. "Results show that performance on trials with delay intervals longer than 10 s was facilitated by rimonabant (2.0 mg/kg) owing to a significantly increased frequency of trials with stronger SmR codes. In contrast, WIN-2 (0.35 mg/kg) suppressed the strength of SmR codes necessary to perform trials with delays greater than 10 s."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed&Cmd=ShowDetailView&TermToSearch=17762525&ordinalpos=3&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
Wanna put the memory section back with source?
Miserlou 00:51, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Some changes