Talk:Lansoprazole

message: After getting a prescription for Prevacid, I was pleased to see that Wikipedia had a page, but was confronted with several unfamiliar terms.  It made the most sense to make them links, so that I could read the other pages.  I'm not completely happy with the Side Effects section - perhaps everything should be a link, even common terms like nausea.
In the course of making the changes, I found several possible misspellings:
* insommnia -> insomnia
* angiodema -> angioedema
* leucopoenia -> leukopenia
* leucocytosis -> leukocytosis
* athralgia -> arthralgia
http://www.wrongdiagnosis.com/medical-misspelling helped in some cases, but it is possible that I've confused two similar technical terms, since I have no medical training.
Also, bisacodyl and delavirdine are non-existant pages with links to them, so I'm reasonably sure they are spelled correctly. JohnWhitlock 19:15, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: And now, they exist.  Wikipedia works.  JohnWhitlock 21:58, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spelling Changes to technical terms 

message: This version of the information appears to be more complete than previous. Does it not? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.70.222.27 (talk • contribs) 
:It is, but that is not the point; much of the content you added seems to have been copied word for word from the lansoprazole prescribing information (evidence here). Linking to prescribing information is fine, but "citing" it verbatim is not. Some of the content present in PIs may also make the atricle too technical for the general reader, which runs contrary to the purpose of an encyclopedia, not to mention this proposal. Original content – in your own words – is more than welcome, but meanwhile, I have reverted your edit. Also, please remember to sign your comments and posts by typing four tildes (like this: ~~~~) before saving: it makes it easier to identify who said what and prevents confusion. Fvasconcellos 19:38, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes 

message: which is it?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.111.220.126 (talk) 01:46, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  rx or otc?  

message: Is the relative price of the generic brand compared to prevacid really necessary? I've never seen this on any other drug related page and it just doesn't seem to fit at all. Wikipedia doesn't really seem the place to list relative prices. 96.30.140.164 (talk) 22:46, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Price 

message: Long term use side effect: as noted by the FDA, Proton pump inhibitors cause a flux of Magnesium in the blood, therefore causing muscle contractions and spasms. Also long term use has been noted in intestinal blockages due to undigested food particles massing together.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.148.205.46 (talk) 14:37, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Long term use side effects 

message: The 3D image should be deleted. It shows only one enantiomer of a racemic compound.  Best regards, --Jü (talk) 16:51, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  3D image 

message: Does anyone know if lansoprazole specifically inhibits certain liver enzymes - as opposed to simply (I presume) partially saturating them as with 3A4 and 2C19?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimw338 (talk • contribs) 23:24, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inhibition of liver enzymes? 

message: this article needs to be rewritten by someone with command in either north american english or british english
there are a bunch of incomplete sentences  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.6.88.206 (talk) 02:05, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  this article would benefit from a complete rewrite 

message: This content was added by  in this dif which i reverted b/c it is based on primary sources that fail WP:MEDRS and was added back in the form in this dif] which i again reverted as it has the same problems:
Lansoprazole selectively interacts with tau neurofibrillary tangles: a biomarker of Alzheimer's disease. Lansoprazole itself does not efficiently cross the blood-brain barrier. However, derivatives of lansoprazole have been investigated as potential PET probes for measuring tau in vivo.   
 and  and the "Evaluation of 11C-Methyl article () are primary sources as defined in WP:MEDRS.  The "Tracing Tau In The Alzheimer’s Brain" is a popular media article describing a primary source - also not OK per WP:MEDRS.   The last source  - is a good source by MEDRS.   What that article says about is as follows: "Lansoprazole was selected as a potential tau PET tracer on the basis of its in-vitro binding affinity for PHF-tau. A series of lansoprazole derivatives, with subnanomolar binding affinity for tau fibrils, was radiolabelled with 11C,60 and more recently with 18F. A study of 11C-N-methyl lansoprazole in mice showed no entry of the tracer into the brain, but this effect was reversed by inhibition of the P-glycoprotein 1 transporter with ciclosporin. By contrast, non-human primate studies with either 11C-lansoprazole or 18F-lansoprazole showed unencumbered tracer entry into the brain. Human studies with these tracers have not been reported to date."   generally we don't report non-human studies.   We could ~potentially~ discuss this in a Research section.... but even that might be UNDUE.   Jytdog (talk) 02:08, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with  that primary sources should be avoided with regards to medical content (per WP:MEDRS). However, Lansoprazole is still an organic compound. While it is primarily notable for its use as a drug for proton pump inhibition(where WP:MEDRS would apply), a section regarding the molecule's notable, published properties is not subject to the same rules. For instance, use of primary sources for a hypothetical section on notable spectral properties of lansoprazole would be acceptable. As for the derivatives, [18F] N-methyl lansoprazole and [11C]N-methyl lansoprazole, these are probably not notable enough to warrant their own article due to the lack of approval for use in humans (as mentioned above). However, their close relationship to lansoprazole as well as their mention in popular media and multiple reviews certainly warrants a brief comment in this article. Bcary (talk) 19:33, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

text: if you ask the question about why you (or anybody) cares about the potential use of lansoprazole analogs as imaging agents, the question about MEDRS becomes clear.  Right? btw, have you read the part of MEDRS called WP:MEDREV?  it explicitly speaks to the popular media stuff.  please do read it.  thanks. Jytdog (talk) 20:05, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The exclusion of unambiguous, noteworthy properties of lansoprazole per MEDRS is totally unwarranted: regardless of potential medical applications. I refer here to the BBB impermeability and the high affinity interaction with tau polymers. These properties are well-demonstrated and very unlikely to be overturned by new evidence (which is, of course, the reason MEDRS exists). I suppose we could exclude the portion regarding the labeled derivatives until more information is available. However, I still support the inclusion of a brief comment. Perhaps, only referring to the derivatives as (potential) research tools. Have a look at Nifene for a similar situation. Also, the popular media source was included to bolster subject notability rather than veracity. Regards. Bcary (talk) 21:15, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: would you please address the question i asked you - why does anybody care if lansoprozole can be used as an imaging agent?  why are those properties worthy of note?  why is the media talking about them?  we can take it from there, once you answer.  Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 21:49, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Those questions are irrelevant? As far as I know, there are no guidelines as to what straightforward, well-demonstrated properties aren't allowed inclusion in a notable compound's article. Bcary (talk) 23:40, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: meh. you are too busy worrying about imagined consequences to have a straightforward conversation, it appears.  I added a new research section on this, sourced to the Lancet review article - the only secondary source there. Jytdog (talk) 01:13, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tau 

message: prevacid is not allowed to be sold in canada  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.95.193.14 (talk) 20:28, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you share more about this? I can't find anything about it. Penguinmlle (talk) 04:16, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  you need a note re canada