Talk:Biodyl

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Veterinary medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Veterinary medicine 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.Veterinary medicineWikipedia:WikiProject Veterinary medicineTemplate:WikiProject Veterinary medicineVeterinary medicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Brands

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands 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.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Another ingredients list: [1]. --Una Smith (talk) 05:28, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Exhausted sources[edit]

Just so no one has to repeat the searches, there is currently no literature on this compound on PubMed or DrugBank. ---kilbad (talk) 20:24, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! That is very helpful information. --Una Smith (talk) 20:39, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know?[edit]

Nominated as a DYK: Template talk:Did you know#Biodyl. --Una Smith (talk) 21:05, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

...that the sudden deaths of 21 polo ponies at an international polo match, attributed to adulterated Biodyl, possibly was due to a compounding error by a local pharmacy?

Articles mentioned in the hook are likely to get a really big spike in page views. --Una Smith (talk) 21:20, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What about interchanging the words "possibly" and "was,"? i.e. "was possibly due to..." ---kilbad (talk) 21:42, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's a misleading statement. It makes it sound like Biodyl was involved, but really it was an attempt by the pharmacy to replicate the formula of Biodyl, not Biodyl itself. Looie496 (talk) 02:11, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please modify the statement as needed. ---kilbad (talk) 02:24, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe replace the last clause with "...is now believed to have been caused by a compounding error by a local pharmacy that was attempting to duplicate the formula for Biodyl". I know it's more complicated, but we are oliged to make it clear that no actual Biodyl was ever involved in this. Looie496 (talk) 02:55, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But actual Biodyl is involved, in that the team uses it routinely all over the world where it is available, and the team captain said they were using it in Florida. The team got slammed in the US media for using an "illegal" and "banned" drug (which Biodyl is not). --Una Smith (talk) 03:33, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All the recent news stories say that it wasn't really Biodyl. From the New York Times: "a statement released to The Associated Press on Thursday by the polo team, Lechuza Caracas, indicated that a team veterinarian had ordered a vitamin mixture similar to Biodyl, a supplement that is not approved by the Food and Drug Administration" Reuters has the same. Biodyl is in fact illegal for veterinary use in the USA, although it is legal in some other countries. The pharmacy tried to replicate the recipe (which is itself of questionable legality), and botched the proportions. Looie496 (talk) 04:20, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To follow up a bit more, you're completely right that the team has used Biodyl, and it might or might not have done long-term harm, but the crucial point is that Biodyl had nothing to do with killing those ponies on that day. Looie496 (talk) 04:24, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How does "not FDA-approved" equal "illegal"? Also, at this point it is still unclear whether the horses were injected with brand name Biodyl, or something else from the Ocala pharmacy. Compounding itself may become illegal, but as I understand it at this time compounding is not subject to FDA approval and not illegal. Finally, the media outcry about the (presumed) use of Biodyl does not vanish just because new information has come to light. --Una Smith (talk) 04:29, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I agree this should be an "In the News" item rather than a DYK... --Una Smith (talk) 03:33, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Will someone post this "In the news"?[edit]

Perhaps someone could try to get this article into the news section? See Wikipedia:In_the_news_section_on_the_Main_Page/Candidates ---kilbad (talk) 00:06, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Biodyl. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 22:25, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]