Talk:Diabetes medication: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 18:46, 4 January 2010

Medicine B‑class High‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Pharmacology B‑class Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Review

PMID 17638715 may be helpful for an expansion. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:58, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This has been added in detail to Diabetes mellitus type 2.Badgettrg 20:15, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question: where to place discussion of selecting anti-diabetic drugs?

The new insulin randomized controlled trial in NEJM (doi:10.1056/NEJMoa075392), along with the question above, raise the important point of where to discuss the trials that guide selecting a treatment regimen for diabetes? This discussion could legitimately go under Diabetes mellitus type 2, Anti-diabetic drug, or insulin. So we do not grow parallel content that is difficult to harmonize, I propose this content only go in one of these places with the other two places noting the discussion and linking to it. I would like to clarify this now before adding doi:10.1056/NEJMoa075392.

I propose this discussion go under Diabetes mellitus type 1 and Diabetes mellitus type 2, which is where most of the discussion is currently. Is this ok?
Badgettrg 20:21, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative/complementary treatments

The "Herbal extracts" section could use some expansion and better referencing. I was surprised to find no mention of Gymnema sylvestre, since it seems to be used widely, both traditionally (especially in India) and as a supplement, and a lot has been published on it (no RCTs, though). Fvasconcellos (t·c) 23:32, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well. Two years on, there is still no mention of Gymnema. I also find it odd that the article mentions Myrcia extracts and not Bauhinia fortificata (pata de vaca), which is arguably the most popular folk remedy for diabetes in Brazil (and for which there is ample evidence of efficacy in animal models), or Syzygium jambolanum, which is also very popular (and has been very extensively researched, although there is no clear-cut evidence to support its use). Fvasconcellos (t·c) 19:30, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Testosterone

Testosterone is the most powerful and safe anti-diabetic drug and therefore I have inserted one paragraph —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.194.199.13 (talk) 16:22, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is too POV "Testosterone deficiency (hypogonadism) can easily results in diabetes mellitus, therefore testosterone replacement therapy is proven to be very effective against diabetes mellitus type 2 because it reduces insulin resistance.^[1]^[2]" Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:02, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is what the articles say! if you want you may also change the sentences, but leavineg the section —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.225.44.181 (talk) 16:02, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which article said this? I looked at both of them and missed "most powerful and safe anti diabetic drug" Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:48, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just ignore this - rehash of indef blocked SPA Testosterone vs diabetes (talk · contribs) giving undue weight to primary sources, but not reflecting majority (general medical consensus) - anon sock block evasions are now being blocked and rehashed talk sections deleted: 83.225.44.181 (talk · contribs) & 93.68.107.68 (talk · contribs). David Ruben ^Talk 03:02, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are wrong!!! there is full scientific consensus on testosterone effectiveness and safety versus diabetes! You just make censorship in order to protect drug business —Preceding unsigned comment added by 158.194.199.13 (talk) 18:40, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia protects drug business

There are many articles stating the safety and effectiveness of testosterone treatment vercus diabetes, of corse Wikipedia, in order to defend drug business, delet the primary sources and block users without reasons

^ Rice (2008). "Men's health, low testosterone, and diabetes: individualized treatment and a multidisciplinary approach". The Diabetes educator. 34 Suppl 5: 97S–112S, quiz 113S–4S. doi:10.1177/0145721708327143. PMID 19020265. {{cite journal}}: |first2= missing |last2= (help); |first3= missing |last3= (help); |first4= missing |last4= (help); |first5= missing |last5= (help); |first6= missing |last6= (help); |first7= missing |last7= (help)
^ Corona (2009). "Following the common association between testosterone deficiency and diabetes mellitus, can testosterone be regarded as a new therapy for diabetes?". International journal of andrology. 32 (5): 431–41. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2605.2009.00965.x. PMID 19538523. {{cite journal}}: |first2= missing |last2= (help); |first3= missing |last3= (help); |first4= missing |last4= (help)

[pubmed19020265-1] Rice (2008). "Men's health, low testosterone, and diabetes: individualized treatment and a multidisciplinary approach". The Diabetes educator. 34 Suppl 5: 97S–112S, quiz 113S–4S. doi:10.1177/0145721708327143. PMID 19020265. {{cite journal}}: |first2= missing |last2= (help); |first3= missing |last3= (help); |first4= missing |last4= (help); |first5= missing |last5= (help); |first6= missing |last6= (help); |first7= missing |last7= (help)

[pmid19538523-2] Corona (2009). "Following the common association between testosterone deficiency and diabetes mellitus, can testosterone be regarded as a new therapy for diabetes?". International journal of andrology. 32 (5): 431–41. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2605.2009.00965.x. PMID 19538523. {{cite journal}}: |first2= missing |last2= (help); |first3= missing |last3= (help); |first4= missing |last4= (help)

[1]

[2]

@@ Line 32: / Line 32: @@
 You are wrong!!! there is full scientific consensus on testosterone effectiveness and safety versus diabetes! You just make censorship in order to protect drug business  <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/158.194.199.13|158.194.199.13]] ([[User talk:158.194.199.13|talk]]) 18:40, 4 January 2010 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
+==Wikipedia protects drug business==
+There are many articles stating the safety and effectiveness of testosterone treatment vercus diabetes, of corse Wikipedia, in order to defend drug business, delet the primary sources and block users without reasons