Talk:Inhalable insulin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Merge Exubera into Inhalable insulin

Generally drug articles should be for the generic product, with any specific brands redirected to it. I have recently restructured Exubera with wikistyle & formating as well as get all the links into cite.php format (I had not search out this article first). Inhalable insulin article currently seems to cover exactly the same material, and although is generally better written, but has some out-of-date citations (e.g. newer final NICE guidence has since been released). I'm happy to do the merging, this is just a quick check for consensus... David Ruben Talk 15:13, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

  • Merge - as above.David Ruben Talk 15:13, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose it's like merging Coca-Cola with Drink, or Viagra with Cialis.--Supparluca 11:10, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge - as above. There will soon be other brands of inhalable insulin. This is just a first-in-class delivery system. Brahim Benyamin 21:07, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Should be merged.

  • Oppose it should not be merged. Exubera is a failed first generation product. It deserves its place in history of failed attempts. Novo Nordisk, Lilly and other drugmakers are working on advancing this delivery technology with more convenient devices.
  • Merge - There are two schools of thought on how to deal with all the drugs in a class. Typical textbooks will discuss the prototype in a class, then discuss each agent highlighting differences. This is probably best for wikipedia. If a redirect is made there does need to be an entry for each drug within the article. S Holland, M.D. Kd4ttc 21:50, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge - as above. Best for wiki. Hyunho13:02, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge - I believe Supparluca's analogies are not compelling. The Coca-Cola/Drink analogy is closer to RonEj's suggestion. I think that suggestion would be stretching things way too far and bring up all sorts of additional questions. The Viagra/Cialis analogy is closer to what DavidRuben is suggesting, but I think still not accurate. Here there is only one drug currently on the market. How different or similar other drugs are when the arrive is yet to be seen. Until then, I think one merged article is appropriate. If and when new drugs become available, it may, or may not, be worth resurrecting a generic category, but for the moment it seems very much redundant. HDow 00:20, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge - A brief search of some generic drug entries and proprietary drug names (examples tested: Nexium, Losec, Tenormin, Byetta, Exanta, Januvia and Plavix) revealed that the main Wikipedia entry is the generic drug with the proprietary names redirecting to the generic drug entry. For consistency, drugs and medicines should listed as their generic name, especially as multiple proprietary names can exist depending on the country in which the product is marketed. Zcoobz 21:53, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Simplify both into diabetes management

I feel it is better to simplify both into the diabetes management topic as what little information that there is on the subject may lead to a bunch of stub class articles. All inhalable items including those used in respiratory and allergies can become part of mentioning for redirects. (Disambiguation, not redirects per se)

--RonEJ 13:27, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


Diabetes management is already pretty large, there's nothing wrong with having articles for various medications. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 35.11.168.157 (talk) 04:30, 29 October 2007 (UTC)