Jump to content

Talk:Medication

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Meds)

Comment 1

[edit]

Shouldn't this article be merge with the one about drug? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.186.223.13 (talk) 20:27, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Standardization of all Drug Articles.

[edit]

I propose that we start a site-wide reconstruction of all medication articles. It seems like the information that we have is very spotty, redundant, and unorganized (and I've mostly just been reading the Anti-Psychotic Articles). I'm asking seriously for an admin or other officer to promote this reformation to really improve a section with such incredible potential.

[edit]

I think the addition of an external link to Mansfield-King "a premier personal care contract specialist. We provide fast, flexible and error-free contract formulating, contract manufacturing and contract packaging." is neither useful nor appropriate to this general article on medication. If there were a separate article on medication packaging, and if this company were particularly notable in that field, then the external link might be appropriate. David Ruben Talk 03:21, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]
Having followed a link from the Medicine article to Iatrogenesis, which listed the article Polypharmacy; I suggest introducing a short indication about consumer drug taking outcomes, as indicated in the polypharmacy article, about multiple drug use. Drakonicon 16:02, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Drugs and brand names

[edit]

Dear all,

There is a discussion about brand names on all drug articles, and the consequences of any decision are not clear. Reading many articles about drugs, it seems to me that there are different approaches about brands and names:

  • Use only the INN name in the article, and cite only the first brand name for historical reasons;
  • Use only INN name in the whole article and have a section for brands, countries and eventual generic drug availability;
  • Cite brand names near the incipit of the article, after the INN name;
  • Use only INN names removing brands;
  • (others that I didn't find in articles).

There are reasons for all of them.

My personal point of view is that brand names are important, and should be cited in a section, indicating countries and names, but only for the pure substance, e.g. Coefferalgan® is a mix of Paracetamol and Codeine, so it should not be mentioned IMO. In the whole article, I'd use just the INN name, and probably the first historical brand name.

I personally find not very clear to have different standards on drugs and medication, and a standardization should be tried.

What is your opinion about this topic? Sensei 10:24, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Not all medicines are commercial products

[edit]

I have simplified the opening paragraph by moving the “legal” details to a later section. As previously written it gave the impression that all medicines are commercial products. Medicines were found in the wild long before they were produced commercially and in many parts of the world still are. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.155.140.254 (talk) 20:34, 6 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Medication/Medicine

[edit]

In my experience routine use of the word "Medication" is limited to North America. In most English speaking parts of the world the word "Medicine" is used instead in addition to its use to denote the field of Medicine. It seems appropriate to acknowledge this in the introductory paragraph. On the first occasion I added this information someone removed it without comment. I have replaced the information and added a reference to the Medicine disambiguation page. Also see Wiki Dictionary "Medicine". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.155.140.254 (talk) 19:14, 8 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Proposal for a modification of the definition

[edit]

Dear all,

a french user translate the definition of this article into the french article. this was reverted as I think that the definition is not complete.

I'm proposing to complete the curent definition: "A medication is any drug taken to cure or reduce the symptoms of an illness or ongoing medical condition. Commercial medications are produced by pharmaceutical companies and are often patented. Those that are not patented are called generic drugs."

by this definition (or any more complete proposal you may wish):

"A medication, medicines or drug is any substance or combination of substances which may be used in or administered to human beings or animals with a view to treating or preventing disease or to making a medical diagnosis. Commercial medications are produced by pharmaceutical companies and are often patented. Copies of former patented drugs are called generic drugs."

this defintion is base on european law which says: (a) Any substance or combination of substances presented as having properties for treating or preventing disease in human beings; or (b) Any substance or combination of substances which may be used in or administered to human beings either with a view to restoring, correcting or modifying physiological functions by exerting a pharmacological, immunological or metabolic action, or to making a medical diagnosis.

Consolidated Directive 2001/83/EC (as amended) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use Title 1, art1, 2 (medicinal product), page13 [1]

I also change the sentence "Those that are not patented are called generic drugs" as in some part of the world (in europe for example) generic may have a different meaning (you can have not patented medicines which are not generic).

I'm waiting for your comments. --Leridant 13:04, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A broader definition of medication

[edit]

What about a historical approach of the use of substances for healing? We should also include, besides modern chemical drugs, ethnobotany, phytotherapy, homeopathy and others wich are widely used.

(Zocastro (talk) 10:24, 11 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Is there anything called slow posion

[edit]

i herd of slow posion and saw in a movie that they will kill her slowly by 1 yera using that drug what is that exactly —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.11.51.170 (talk) 09:10, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could be anything realy depending on the dosage and time. Most likely some Heavy Metal, Lead, Arsen, Copper f.e. are realtivly easy to get and poisen with time and time again. Or do you mean they only gave her something ONCE? Then its probably just a movies invention. Altough it could be something biological like an illness (see Cracy Cow Disease or HIV) that is deadly (at least untreated) but takes a long time to symptomize. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.81.194.79 (talk) 12:01, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pharmaceutical drugs

[edit]

The article appears to be about drugs produced by pharmaceutical companies rather than medication in any broader sense. Perhaps the content should be at Pharmaceutical drugs. Laurel Bush (talk) 11:40, 2 February 2009 (UTC).[reply]

I have just moved the page to Pharmaceutical drug, and Medication is now a redirect to Drug. Laurel Bush (talk) 17:33, 2 February 2009 (UTC)>[reply]

In my opinion, it doesn't matter too much whether the article is titled "medication" or "pharmaceutical drug". But if it is "pharmaceutical drug", then medication should redirect to pharmaceutical drug because that is by far the most common meaning compared to the band medication (band). The current disambiguation page could then be moved to medication (disambiguation). ChemNerd (talk) 16:39, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll go along with that, Medication as a redirect to Pharmaceutical drug, for the time being, Medication is, to my mind, a bit of a euphemism. Laurel Bush (talk) 11:03, 4 February 2009 (UTC).[reply]

I have moved it now. ChemNerd (talk) 21:23, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Further thoughts
I did have Medication as a redirect to Drug, until I realised there was Medication (band) to disambiguate
Is it appropriate for Wikipedia articles to imply that the pharmaceutical industry has a monopoly on drug morality?
The implication of monopoly on morality is apparent, to my mind, in use of medication to mean pharmaceutical drug, either as the title of an article about pharmaceutical drugs or as a redirect to that article
Illicit cannabis, for example is often produced and supplied by people who seem honestly to believe that they are providing medication
But, I will leave Medication as it is for now
Laurel Bush (talk) 11:12, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am thinking now that pharmaceutical drug may just mean drug drug
Is there any real difference between pharmacology and drug science or drug research and development, and does Wikipedia have two articles, Drug and Pharmaceutical drug where there should be just one?
Laurel Bush (talk) 09:57, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if the two articles should be separate or not without looking at the content in more detail, but I definitely think pharmaceutical drug is a strange name for this article.--Taylornate (talk) 14:59, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A quick look at current content of Pharmaceutical drug suggests it might be better placed at Medication
where it was before I moved it in 2009
with medication defined as drug produced or used for medical or therapeutic purposes - and definition of medical and therapeutic left as far as possible to the Medicine and Therapy articles
Pharmaceutical drug could then redirect to Drug
Laurel Bush (talk) 16:31, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orphan Drugs

[edit]

Under analgesics, it says various orphans such as paracetamol, tricyclic antidepressants and anticonvulsants. But what is the basis for listing any of these as "orphan drugs" since they do not treat rare diseases? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.85.182.166 (talk) 19:52, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Essential drugs

[edit]

Perhaps the phramaceutical drugs found essential by the WHo may be described in more detail in the article see List of World Health Organization Essential Medicines —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.245.183.20 (talk) 12:12, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

The links to the Wikipedias in other languages redirect to the equivalent "Medicine" term in those languages, instead of "medicament". Is it supposed to be right? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Draxtreme (talk • contribs) 19:38, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Someone changed the interlanguage links. I agree with Draxtreme, new links don't seem right. The links were "medicament" instead of "medicine" before april 27 2010 (diffs : first change, second change and some corrections [2], [3], [4]). Xiglofre (talk) 20:44, 27 May 2010 (UTC).[reply]

For the central nervous system

[edit]

Opioids are major drugs that effects CNS.It is missing under the topic.

Blockbuster drug

[edit]

The definition given "generating more than $1 billion of revenue" is very dated. It needs to specify in what currency, and at what time period. (i.e. $1 billion in 2012 USD is a lot less value than $1 billion in 1900 USD). Zodon (talk) 06:41, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Greek word Pharmakea is where the word pharmacutical came from

[edit]

I believe this should be added to the article. 2602:306:C518:62C0:1E75:8FF:FEBB:2125 (talk) 06:08, 17 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

New matter on environmental effects

[edit]

Hi User:Kacampbell13 - I understand you are a student and are not experienced in Wiklpedia. As I wrote in the edit note, the way things work in Wikipedia is that articles grow organically. When a section gets too long, it is split off into its own article. When that is done, a summary section, based on the lead section of the split off article, is left in the original article. It is important to pay mind to this -- if we don't -- if people just update the main article and ignore the split-off article, we end up with contradictory information in Wikipedia. So what you do, is that if you have updated information, it goes into the body of the split-off article. You then update the lead of the split-off article (if what you added is important enough to make it to the lead of that article), and then you update the "stub" in the main article. Please do that with your new matter. Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 13:12, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Repetitive line

[edit]

Isn't the following line in the article, at Regulation, last line,

> Many countries, such as the United Kingdom have a third category of pharmacy medicines which can only be sold in registered pharmacies, by or under the supervision of a pharmacist.

-- simply a repetition of the following, in the previous paragraph,

> A third category, behind-the-counter medications (BTMs), is implemented in some jurisdictions. BTMs do not require a prescription, but must be kept in the dispensary, not visible to the public, and only be sold by a pharmacist or pharmacy technician.

-- so that the two need to be combined into one -- I suggest as follows,

> A third category, known in the US as behind-the-counter medications (BTMs), is implemented in some jurisdictions, such as the United Kingdom and France. BTMs do not require a prescription, but must only be kept in the dispensary of registered pharmacies, not visible to the public, and sold only by or under the supervision of a pharmacist or pharmacy technician.

--Kessler (talk) 15:31, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

content on generics

[edit]

‎Jorge Guerra Pires you have been adding content on legislation concerning generic drugs in the Costs section. That section is literally about costs. I noticed that this article doesn't have a subsection on generics. Shall we make one? We can just use the lead from the generic drugs and treat that like a WP:SPLIT. Sound ok? Jytdog (talk) 21:45, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Pharmaceutical drug. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:31, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 27 January 2018

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Andrewa (talk) 19:44, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pharmaceutical drug → Medication – Medication is a more concise title than Pharmaceutical drug. It is far more common than the current title. 50.200.165.226 (talk) 21:04, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Added sentence

[edit]

I added a sentence about pharmaceutical monopolies. Feel free to remove. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChiaO (talk • contribs)

[edit]

Added internal link to "Access to medicines" article ChiaO (talk)

Usage

[edit]

This section quotes some statistics for elderly people but makes no statement about a conclusion. I would propose deleting this section unless something is added to make use of the statistics. VernonF (talk) 20:02, 27 July 2019 (UTC) VernonF[reply]

Types of Medicine Section

[edit]

Something needs to be done about the "Types of Medicine" section and it's numerous subsections. Should it be removed as it is a near duplication of the "Major drug groups" template that is at the bottom of the article? Penguinmlle (talk) 21:56, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Medication&oldid=1225920112"