Talk:Idebenone

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 Idebenone.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

How's about some sources there pops?

Sources

This article has no sources and I've marked it as such. Also removed a link that was nothing more than unsubstantiated advertising. Emp² 14:24, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I removed more advertising. There are allot of nootropics articles that I really would like to rewrite from scratch with better citations; this is one of them. 128.205.75.125 (talk) 02:12, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As many of these unsourced statements could be perceived as advertising for nootropic vendors over regular pharmacies (i.e. by saying Idebenone is better than CoQ10), and as after a number of searches on Google Scholar and Google, the closest thing to a source that I've found is this advertising page. I've removed this information that is most likely incorrect. --118.90.130.71 (talk) 20:27, 27 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Validity

Idebenone's nootropic effect is doubtful. In May 1998, Its approval as nootropic in Japan was cancelled. I couldn't find detailed reason, but it was enough to make me question its effects. --Parkyere (talk) 02:59, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Superoxide formation

Increase in superoxide formation in vitro? (pro-oxidant?) (from 68.6.123.194, moved from article by ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 08:40, 30 March 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Suspicious

Find this article suspicious, though Idebenone has been in the news here and there. As a purported free radical scavenger, I can not see any benefit of this over a plain old multivitamin, which is probably why it never gets through a clinical trial. 155.41.193.166 (talk) 22:50, 29 July 2011 (UTC)brad[reply]

Do you find the article or the drug suspicious? As far as I can tell, the article says a lot about the fact that idebenone hasn't been convincing in trials. I can see no advertising. If you could point me to specific claims in the article you find suspicious, we may be able to mend them. Thanks.

By the way, the drug seems to be approved in Italy and Switzerland [1], but I can't tell whether it is actually available. And this wouldn't be a prove of its effectiveness, of course. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 07:02, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]