Talk:Acarbose

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.

Pharmacology Start‑class Mid‑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
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.

WHere was the structure for acarbose sourced? I think the stereocenters might be wrong. I have a feeling it was sourced on PubChem. There are MULTIPLE acarbose structures on PubChem. See here. The think the correct stereo is as shown here oChemSpider. However, this is my opinion and it needs confirming. Help.--ChemSpiderMan (talk) 00:30, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I used PubChem as a source at the time. I'm not sure of the stereochemistry; as you just said, help :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:57, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The information from Bayer is here it seems its sold as a mixture of anomers --Seansheep (talk) 10:09, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Patent information

It seems to me it would be interesting to have some information on patents etc, but I'm not sure if this is the norm for page on drugs? Aparently the patent for this was granted in sept 2005 (DrugPatentWatch) seems like this should be a reliable source for this info. Any thoughts?? Seansheep (talk) 10:09, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Section entitled, "Relationship to etiology of Type 2 diabetes mellitus."

This section is not cited, and its thesis not completely (or really at all) accepted among diabetes researchers...complex metabolic syndrome has not been attributed to carbohydrate intake necessarily. Obesity in general is certainly a risk factor for T2D, but is not the only cause. Regardless of that debate, I'm not sure this particular section is especially germane to this entry.