Talk:Atomoxetine/Archive 1

Can someone point out when and how it became available in generic forms? As far as I know, Strattera is pretty new and won't be available generically for years.

I believe drug patents last for fifteen years in the U.S. and Canada. Marketresearch.com lists the patent expiry date as 2015.

Commercial Insight: ADHD - Strattera Reigns Supreme as Branded Stimulants Slump, Datamonitor, Jul. 22, 2005 --Ddro 15:21, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

I have updated the page with accurate information. Currently the only generic manufacturered is outside of the United States in India by a company called Torrent Pharmaceuticals.

Why does it say that strattera can exacerbate anxiety disorders? One of the off-label uses is in the treatment of these disorders.


 * It is theorized that an excess of norepinepherine can be a cause of certain types of anxiety. But as with all psychotropic drugs, treatment is highly individualized, as what may work wonders for one person's condition may make another person with the same condition worse. --Prisonnet 03:40, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm having a pretty horrible experience on this medication. I really do hope it's helping some people but genuinly pity the folks who are having the same experience as I. I am consulting with my family doctor on discontinuing use this Monday... Thank-you to those who have updated this page, it has been very helpful. --Wootabega 12:21, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I am concerned about a medical conditon I got while on Strattera. I developed small testes and heavy sweating in that area. Also, was diagnosed with Low Testostrone. Could someone do some research reguarding blood constriction or vasoconsrtiction and Strattera. I noticed that other professionals are insulted when information about this health condition is entered about Strattera on Wikipedia or reference to Ritalin and similar side effects. I am concerned about false advertisments and misleading information about medications. I could not even enter that Strattera causes vassoconstriction. So, it seems like there is an objection to my information. I did not mean to violate wikipedia policy. I was just trying be more specific than the watered down explaination the drug company gives about how this medication works. I know that a lot of professionas swear by these medications but why tell us that we are violating wikipedia when we might be having an illness caused by a medication. I am sorry if this information was biased. But I think the drug companies and many professionals could also be biased. So, I am concerned about being censered when it comes to having a medical condition and basic knowledge. I had to pay $125 (with insurance) on a month supply of this. I have been on the medication for a month now and don't see any significant results.Mdriver1981 22:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

I have been on this Strattera for 2 weeks now and the effect on my ADD is remarkable... now the bad part... I am experiencing some sexual side effects (ED), while this is bad, I would like to know if anyone has tried or has been prescribed Viagra (or like drug) to offset this? I really like the improvement in my focus and mental state, but I'm not sure I can live with the only side effect I am experiencing in the long term...

From the "Psychiatric reactions" section: In September 2005, Strattera was determined to increase risk of suicidal thoughts among children and adolescents; one attempted suicide and five cases of suicidal thoughts were reported out of 1,357 young patients taking Strattera, while none were reported out of a control group of 851 taking placebos.

Well, I see one major problem here...there's only 851 people in the control group, and 1357, over half again as much, in the experimental! In any group, if you increase the size, there's going to be a greater chance of such an event or thought occurring...now, if they did, say, 1k taking straterra, and 1k taking a placebo, and notice a difference...you've got something...but then again, also, in 1357 people, the results they got are a small percentage of the experimental population, so I would question the significance of the difference as well. Jimfromtx (talk) 08:18, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

How much of an idiot do you have to be to believe that the study described here actually proves a link between Strattera use and suicidal thoughts? 128.6.168.245 03:48, 19 February 2007 (UTC) --- I am the father of a Ten years old boy, suffering from ADHD with mild autism (Pervasive Developmental Disorder). For the last 6 years I am looking for a suitable drug for my son. Tried almost everything but Atomoxetine. Would anyone pls let me know, whether Atomoxetine is bringing good result in similar cases.

--- Can someone find a reference for the drowsiness side effect in neuro-typical adults as opposed to ADHD adults? I know there is a chemical dependency with stimulant treatments, just like not being able to wake up without your caffeine, and want to know if this is a study based finding or anecdotal from patients.


 * Disputed claim removed, pending citation:

The most common side effect in adults is drowsiness. This can be counteracted in some patients by measures as simple as a cup of coffee, or breathing exercises, while others become exhausted a short while after taking the pills, and can sleep for up to 10+ hours. Some patients tend to feel lightheaded, dizzy, or "buzzed" as a minor side effect along with the drowsiness. To diminish these side effects, which can interfere with daytime work, study, etc., dosing time is sometimes changed to just before bed; as Strattera is long-acting, it does not "wear off" overnight. Mild hallucinations can be experienced under high doses (300mg). Also very common is digestive discomfort, such as heartburn. The most common side effects in children and adolescents (and, after drowsiness, in adults) are upset stomach, sporadic nausea, and sudden vomiting. …
 * -Antonius- (talk) 09:07, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

---

So I added an "experimental uses" section and now it isn't showing the reference and external links sections. I don't know what I did wrong. Could somebody help me out?

Never mind, I fixed it. =)

- I don't understand why the article says that the major side effect for atomoxetine is fatigue. Preliminary studies actually find it effective for treating fatigue in some cases("Adjunctive atomoxetine for residual fatigue in major depressive disorder." Journal of Psychiatric Research; Jun2006, Vol. 40 Issue 4, p370-373). The most common side effect (based on four studis) that occurred more frequently than in placebo was decreased appetite. In these four trials, the amount of people who complained of fatigue was statistically similar to the placebo groups.("Atomoxetine." By: Simpson, Dene; Perry, Caroline M.. Pediatric Drugs, 2003, Vol. 5 Issue 6, p407)

I can find more studies to support this if anyone feels like this isn't an adequate amount of evidence.

Does anyone have an objection to me changing the side effects section to reflect this?

-Apagadomenina

Personal experience echoes that: atomoxetine alleviates the fatigue induced by celexa Yudel 01:00, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

First non-stimulant drug ?
I don't know if this is classed as a stimulant or not, but it seems logical that a norepinepherine reuptake inhibitor that improves concentration and possibly combats fatigue is very close to being a stimulant. No matter what the case, it hardly seems to belong in the first line and personally I think it sounds like commercial Strattera marketing. Any thoughts? - cyclosarin 21:30, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't know much about how drugs work, but the statement seems to be true based on my experience at least. Other medications made me wired and kept me up at night the same way that coffee does, but this drug didn't.  --24.235.231.206 16:00, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed on both counts. It's not an issue very often (some might call it a philosophical point) but the distinction between stimulant and non-stimulant is pretty arbitrary. In the end, if the effect's the same.... There may be a particular (biochemical) conceptual definition used by the FDA, but I'd bet (totally outside my knowledge base, though) they just have a laundry list of basic compounds that "are stimulants"--no further rationale attempted. And yes, the article reads like a watered-down ad. MilFlyboy (talk) 05:46, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Stimulants are indirectly acting sympathomimetic compounds that cause the release of numerous transmitters, including DA, NE, and 5HT. This drug is specific for NE and it inhibits uptake.128.143.65.50 (talk) 01:41, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Heart Attack Risk?
Much has been written about potential heart attack risks from this drug. Some information on this would be helpful, and I actually think it warrants its own section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.232.62.16 (talk) 21:59, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Heart Attack Risk?
Much has been written about potential heart attack risks from this drug. Some information on this would be helpful, and I actually think it warrants its own section. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.232.62.16 (talk) 21:59, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

another generic ?
look here: http://www.saverxcanada.com/drugs/Strattera http://www.saverxcanada.com/drugs/Tomoxetin

if you click at particular dosage, there is another much cheaper drug on the right and for some of them like 100mg there is only non-original version available, but I have doubt that this offer is a scam, anyone bought there ? pwjbbb (talk) 20:23, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Generic strattera is available from India through the Canadian pharmacies with an RX only.

article reads like a drug company advertisement
I'm not convinced that the information on Atomoxetine is accurate from a purely scientific viewpoint. There seems to be no difference between the wording of this article and the wording of the consumer information put out by the pharmaceutical concerns who sell the drug. I have to wonder about the neutrality of this article as it stands. Kulturvultur (talk) 22:38, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

"In this case, atomoxetine has great potential in the treatment of schizophrenia and the Predominantly Inattentive subtype of ADHD (once separately designated Attention-Deficit Disorder (ADD), now often referred to as the subtype ADD-PI). In many cases of the above-mentioned disorders of thought, it is said to work seamlessly better and with fewer negative side-effects than any of the available (approved) anti-psychotics."

This part is particularly bad. It at first claims of "great potential", then claims it's "seamlessly better".--Ryankv (talk) 01:23, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Citation
"It may be abused if taken in larger amounts than the daily dosage, the effects may be compared to those experienced on amphetamines that are also used for ADHD medication."

this could use some citation, it sounds like original research...

Dopamine Beta-Hydroxylase Deficiency
I'm really interested in what the interaction would be between people who have Dopamine Beta-Hydroxylase Deficiency and taking strattera. Anyone know anything about that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Interestedperson (talk • contribs) 01:01, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikiproject Indiana
I'm not sure that an article with only incidental relation to Indiana (i.e. a product sold by a company based in that state) qualifies as "within the scope" of Wikiproject Indiana. Anybody have thoughts on this? Reasons why it belongs? --Aurochs (Talk | Block)

Definition of "Sexual problems"
Uhh... just what do they mean by "sexual problems"? I clicked on the link, but all I got was a bunch of useless information (kind of like Yahoo search). I take Strattera, but my doctor didn't get into detail about the sexual side effects when I asked him if there would be any. 74.192.58.206 (talk) 05:48, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

From 71.181.126.71
I am no longer useing large chunks of information. I am starting to learn how to use Wikipedia. So, this is a learning experience. Since websites are not usually reliable would you recomend books or magazines? You will find opinion in just about anything but, it is hard with medications to find a solid fact. Mostly because of marketing practices and theories. This subject is very contraversial. I see your point on my views being one sided and understand I am not a scientist. I am looking at things from a consumer or business point and do see red flags in misleading or false advertising. So, I will try to stick to that subject matter and not science. It would be interesting to see what you are looking for in this reguard. Eli Lilly has even posted heart problems and constriction as problems. Such as constriction in the eyes and in the blood — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.181.126.71 (talk) 03:36, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * As I mentioned on your talk page, for articles about medical subjects, our gold standard are review articles published in high quality, reliable medical (or other science) journals. Books may work, but the problem is that since Atomoxetine is relatively new, there may not be a lot in books.  By magazines, if you mean medical/science journals, then yes, but again, not individual/case studies, and generally not common interest magazines.  General science magazines may be okay, but even newspapers are questionable (although, of course, for things like the patent and lawsuit issues, news publishers are the best source). On medical issues, it will be very rare for websites to be reliable sources (except when those sites are merely reprinting one of the sources I already mentioned) Eli Lilly's info would actually not even be reliable for the effects or uses of the drug (except for statements verified by the FDA).  Since this is clearly a new kind of writing for you, I recommend that you propose changes here, on the talk page, first, and see what other editors think, before adding them to the article.  This may make it easier for you to get the hang of how we write.
 * One final point. If you see your "job" here being to correct the misleading, underhanded techniques of marketers and drug manufacturers, then you may want to strongly consider just walking away. We have an essay about Tendentious editing, part of which is called WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS.  This essay explains that Righting Great Wrongs simply isn't what Wikipedia is here to do. All we do is repeat back what reliable sources have said. Qwyrxian (talk) 03:59, 5 August 2011 (UTC)