Talk:Zicam

This article was nominated for deletion on 27 July 2014 (UTC). The result of the discussion was speedy keep.

Archives

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

First "Citation Needed"[edit]

There was a discussion of the tag within the text of the article. I'm moving that discussion here and deleting it from the article. Swsail (talk) 15:09, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"The citation is needed (preferably from Matrixx) to document the derivation of the portmanteau, not for the meaning of ICAM-1. The wikilink serves that purpose. Without that link, we have OR."

"Other sources list the zinc content as 33 mM"[edit]

I was unable to access the citation(number 6) for this claim because the source blocked my IP address for some reason, and if I did the math correctly, this claim seems rather implausible. If I'm correct in assuming mM stand for millimoles, then .033 mols * 65.38 g/mol (grams per mol of a zinc atom) = 2.158 grams. This seems like a highly improbable amount of zinc, especially considering that multiple lozenges of zicam are meant to be taken each day. Am i missing anything? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zope50 (talk • contribs) 01:56, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Why would a ref be blocked because of your IP? I've never heard of that. Has your IP offended the internet? Here it is.[1] -- BullRangifer (talk) 05:42, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I was able to view it by using a proxy, but I have no idea why my IP is blocked. Anyway, in the source, it appears that zinc concentration is 33 mM / liter of solution, as opposed to 33 mM of zinc in one lozenge or one nasal spray.Zope50 (talk) 06:27, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to improve that content. Take a look. Is that good enough? -- BullRangifer (talk) 14:59, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The link prompted me for a username and password, so I think it's behind a paywall; since the website is blacklisted by Sucuri SiteCheck, I removed the link entirely. Bwrs (talk) 20:22, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Zicam. 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:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20131203025544/http://www.bioforceusa.com/pflant-encyclopaedia/luffa_operculata.php to http://www.bioforceusa.com/pflant-encyclopaedia/luffa_operculata.php

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) 19:06, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oxymetazoline[edit]

Zicam now contains Oxymetazoline HCl, which is not a homepathic, but rather a recognized drug for relieving congestion (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxymetazoline )

Shouldn't this be mentioned in the article? (I got a little flustered with myself when I bought some to try, thought it worked, came here to read it was hokum, then read the label and found it actually contained real medicine). 71.93.61.178 (talk) 20:25, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing use of colon and citations[edit]

Hello, I'm very new at this, so I'll thank you in advance for your patience if this is the wrong way to proceed. I'm posting because the following sentence is either misleading or written in a way that is confusing: "Various non-scientific private studies done by and for the homeopathic industry support its cold-reduction claims: Center of Integrative Medicine^[1] and Department of Infections Diseases, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland OH.^[2]" The placement of the colon seems to indicate that claims will be listed, not the institutional affiliations of the studies' authors. The larger problem, however, is the implication that the Cleveland Clinic supports "non-scientific private studies done by and for the homeopathic industry."

I'm a lifetime editor but, as I mentioned, a newly minted Wikipedian, so I didn't want go any further than pointing this out. Jschrifty (talk) 14:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

^ Hirt, M; Nobel, S; Barron, E (Oct 2000). "Zinc nasal gel for the treatment of common cold symptoms: a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial". Ear, Nose, & Throat Journal. 79 (10): 778–780, 782. doi:10.1177/014556130007901008. PMID 11055098. S2CID 20317285.
^ Mossad, S.B. (1 January 2003). "Effect of zincum gluconicum nasal gel on the duration and symptom severity of the common cold in otherwise healthy adults". QJM. 96 (1): 35–43. doi:10.1093/qjmed/hcg004. PMID 12509647. Retrieved 1 August 2014.

[1] Hirt, M; Nobel, S; Barron, E (Oct 2000). "Zinc nasal gel for the treatment of common cold symptoms: a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial". Ear, Nose, & Throat Journal. 79 (10): 778–780, 782. doi:10.1177/014556130007901008. PMID 11055098. S2CID 20317285.

[2] Mossad, S.B. (1 January 2003). "Effect of zincum gluconicum nasal gel on the duration and symptom severity of the common cold in otherwise healthy adults". QJM. 96 (1): 35–43. doi:10.1093/qjmed/hcg004. PMID 12509647. Retrieved 1 August 2014.

[1]

[2]