Talk:Cocaine: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 22:18, 17 July 2011

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Cocaine article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5: 100 days

Cocaine was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 27, 2004	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
March 27, 2005	Peer review	Reviewed
December 19, 2005	Good article nominee	Listed
September 10, 2007	Good article reassessment	Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Chemicals Start‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.ChemicalsWikipedia:WikiProject ChemicalsTemplate:WikiProject Chemicalschemicals articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Pharmacology C‑class High‑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
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Indigenous peoples of the Americas

	Indigenous peoples of the Americas portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the Americas, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Indigenous peoples of the Americas 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.Indigenous peoples of the AmericasWikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the AmericasTemplate:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of the AmericasIndigenous peoples of the Americas articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Medicine C‑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
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Index

Archive 1	Archive 2	Archive 3
Archive 4	Archive 5

This page has archives. Sections older than 100 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

problems with the first paragraph

saying "cocaine is addictive." is misleading, suggesting the compound always causes addiction - whereas the vast majority of people who try cocaine do not become addicted. i think this should be rephrased "cocaine use has often been associated with addiction."

Factual Error: Cutting agent Levamisole is not inert

Levamisole is a drug and it has a relatively high incidence of potentially serious side effects. Wikipedia's own Levamisole page discusses these dangers and has links to sources: Levamisole#Illicit_use. As it doesn't fit in the other bullets in this section, there should probably be an "Other" section or something to that effect.

I would edit myself, since this is a clearcut factual error, but the page is protected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.97.156.0 (talk) 08:28, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

uncited section claiming cocaine is not a narcotic

can't edit the page but I noticed this. I have worked in a pharmacy and essentially narcotic as a legal definition does include cocaine. Pretty much any drug schedule II or above I believe is considered narcotic; you can look it up, by all means, but I know the legal definition is more inclusion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.108.27.110 (talk) 15:46, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request from 76.114.100.51, 20 June 2011

{{edit semi-protected}} Under heading "Physical Mechanisms" is the following sentence, "Sigma receptors are effected by cocaine..." This should be changed to "Sigma receptors are affected by cocaine" "Affect" is a transitive verb. "Effect" is usually a noun (though it can be a verb, that usage is reserved for a specific meaning not implied by the context here.) In this case "effected" is grammatically incorrect and contextually inappropriate. 76.114.100.51 (talk) 06:56, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Changed. Thanks. Materialscientist (talk) 07:10, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Request - Cocaine Bioavailability

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

- Under the section labeled 'Pharmacokinetic data', it cites the bioavailability of intranasal cocaine consumption to be between 60 and 80%. However, based on a number of articles I've come across (including this one: http://books.google.com/books?id=i2gQfwSjM8wC&pg=PA40&lpg=PA40&dq=cocaine+bioavailability&source=bl&ots=RKOKeImxgb&sig=fGbDkQmqw-lhNzXTO2s8dmJbR7o&hl=en&ei=My0JTvrhKbSisQLo0oHRAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=7&ved=0CFAQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=cocaine%20bioavailability&f=false), this value should be more along the lines of 30-40%. PUtbone 04:58, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Not done for now:Could you provide some more links. The one you provided is from an old book and could be outdated. Ryan Vesey (talk) 21:11, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah sure, no problem. Here's the abstract from a 2000 study done on the bioavailability of cocaine, oral vs. intranasal. They found that oral absorption was 33%, and total nasal absorption was 31%. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10954344

Cocaine and heart disease not related

http://www.health24.com/news/Heart_Cardiovascular/1-958,60662.asp — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.167.63.220 (talk) 22:09, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sherlock Holmes

Conan Doyle called the drug "cocaine", but, according to a doctor reading the stories, the effects were more like those of an opium or an opiate such as morphine. This seems to be the result of the limits of that author's knowledge. David R. Ingham (talk) 03:26, 9 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

moral status of phototgraph

I don't doubt the legality of placing this photograph of a woman "smoking crack" (although it isn't actually verifiable that she's smoking anything, let alone crack). I do think there's a moral issue though. Think of it this way: let's say it was a picture of someone vomiting from chemotherapy who didn't know or hadn't consented to publication of a picture of them vomiting from chemotherapy being published here. But we publish it, and it's legal to do so. That's obviously not ok. It's obvious to me anyway. Unless wikipedia is a tabloid newspaper.

I don't see the difference between that case and this one. It should be taken down unless the woman is ok with it being there and says so verifiably.

@@ Line 74: / Line 74: @@
 Conan Doyle called the drug "cocaine", but, according to a doctor reading the stories, the effects were more like those of an opium or an opiate such as morphine.  This seems to be the result of the limits of that author's knowledge.  [[User:David R. Ingham|David R. Ingham]] ([[User talk:David R. Ingham|talk]]) 03:26, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
+== moral status of phototgraph ==
+I don't doubt the legality of placing this photograph of a woman "smoking crack" (although it isn't actually verifiable that she's smoking anything, let alone crack). I do think there's a moral issue though. Think of it this way: let's say it was a picture of someone vomiting from chemotherapy who didn't know or hadn't consented to publication of a picture of them vomiting from chemotherapy being published here. But we publish it, and it's legal to do so. That's obviously not ok. It's obvious to me anyway. Unless wikipedia is a tabloid newspaper.
+I don't see the difference between that case and this one.  It should be taken down unless the woman is ok with it being there and says so verifiably.