Talk:Tegaserod

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Tegaserod.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

Was once approved for men (but has since been taken off market)

Just caught the end of the new Zelnorm ad. It looks like it's approved for men now. Can anyone confirm that? --Spikey 04:05, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC)

I guess so, since I got perscribted it today, and I'm a man. Maximumlobster 23:00, 20 December 2005 (UTC)m[reply]

I added the header here to preserve the format of the page. New comments go at the bottom and you create a header byputting your topic between two equal signs. Thanks!LiPollis (talk) 16:48, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong Molecule

The molecule in this Wikipedia article does not appear to be the same as the molecule in the PI (Zelnorm PI).

Actually, unless I'm missing something big here, most of the chemical information appears to be wrong. Also from the PI:
"Zelnorm^® (tegaserod maleate) tablets contain tegaserod as the hydrogen maleate salt. As the maleate salt, tegaserod is chemically designated as 3-(5-methoxy-1H-indol-3-ylmethylene)-N- pentylcarbazimidamide hydrogen maleate. Its empirical formula is C₁₆H₂₃N₅O•C₄H₄O₄. The molecular weight is 417.47..." --216.139.146.106 20:51, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I modeled the molecule using the SMILES provided on the tegaserod PubChem entry. As for the rest of the information provided in the infobox, such as empirical formula and molecular weight, it refers to the active moiety only ("tegaserod" itself), not to the salt (maleate) form of tegaserod, as is standard on most drug pages. I do not feel it is necessary, but I will be happy to add information for both if you feel it is relevant (you could also do it yourself, of course). Fvasconcellos 21:40, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Changes March 30, 2007

I made two small changes that I felt I should doc on the tp. First, I changed The FDA discovered... to The FDA alleges... because apparently there is some discord between the FDA and Novartis on these symptoms. Secondly, I changed the reference for Novartis' assertion to a PDF press release because chances are that homepage will change and no longer be a press release on the front page. That's all // 3R1C 23:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. I thought of using the press release directly, and chose not to... bad choice apparently :) Fvasconcellos 00:03, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Use was the only drug approved ...

Are not peppermint oil, and Mebeverine approved for IBS in the US? Midgley (talk) 17:29, 2 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

POV?

the repeated use of words like 'supposedly' and 'allegedly' in their various forms seems to me to put a fairly negative spin on this article. don't get me wrong, i am personally of the impression that this is a bad drug. i suffer from ibs myself, and would rather continue to do so than risk the cv complications that use of tegaserod seems to entail. but those words have connotations and the flavour of this article seems to me to be somewhat in violation of npov.Toyokuni3 (talk) 15:31, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]