Talk:Prenatal cocaine exposure

A fact from Prenatal cocaine exposure appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 27 August 2010 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that using cocaine while pregnant is thought to be less harmful to the baby than alcohol?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2010/August.

Wikipedia

Medicine Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Disability

Prenatal cocaine exposure is within the scope of WikiProject Disability. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.DisabilityWikipedia:WikiProject DisabilityTemplate:WikiProject DisabilityDisability articles

Women's Health

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's Health, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's Health 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.Women's HealthWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HealthTemplate:WikiProject Women's Healthwomen's health articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Such bias

The whole section about Social Stigma makes it sound like we shouldn't look down on kids with this problem, that it's a stigma but should be embraced. It shouldn't. And also why are so many american mothers doing this? I've seen the figures for each country and the US, well they're just not very good. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.177.213.24 (talk) 12:02, 27 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

3%??!

Up to 3% of pregnant women worldwide use cocaine. maybe in the U.S., but most pregnant women in China or India don't use cocaine. I dont know what kind of source such a "fact" comes from, but its total bs.

signed: anonymous 19:42, 14 April 2012 (MET) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.252.194.132 (talk)

Error in Pathophysiology

In this section, the article claims that the euphoria caused by cocaine is due to the accumulation of Serotonin it causes; that's wrong, the euphoria is almost exclusively due to the accumulation of Dopamine, not Serotonin, that's just plain wrong; when Serotonin accumulates it activates all of its receptors and some of them may cause anxiolysis, empathy and some elation, but even still, the euphoria and happiness of Cocaine is mostly due to Dopamine, by a large margin.

--177.230.93.9 (talk) 01:00, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It never hurts to cite a reliable source for your assertion.--Quisqualis (talk) 04:13, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing article

It seems like the whole first half of the article goes as far as possible to say that there are little or no effects from PCE. Then starting with PREGANCY AND BIRTH a whole array of serious related defects are listed. Seems like the article should have been titled "WE DON'T HAVE A CLUE". We adopted a child who was positive for cocaine at birth and she was premature and her respiratory system was severely affected. When she was released to us from the hospital at 10 months she had a trach with a ventilator, low, fluctuating blood ox and a G-TUBE. She is now 12 and has suffered from ADHD, low IQ and learning ability, emotional and impulse control issues and balance and physical setbacks. This has all been documented by physician and psychioatrists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.0.222.71 (talk) 10:46, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

needs update

@Delldot basically wrote this article single-handedly (80% of text per page statistic) mostly in 2010, and lots of refs are from 2014, i.e 10 years old, with his last edit in 2016. Since then little substantial text was added and outdated stuff remains. Long term studies have been published by now. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ntt.2024.107335 from Pittsburgh and https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38758554/ from Cleveland. For example The sentence in the lede stating "studies have failed to clearly show that PCE has negative cognitive effects....." is incorrect, no longer true and I will remove it. Wuerzele (talk) 17:35, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]