Talk:Bromhexine

Copyright violation
I have just removed slabs of text copied verbatim from the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration Product Information Template for Bromhexine. All material on the TGA website is copyrighted unless stated otherwise. --Russell E 01:04, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Misclassified?
"Bromhexine is a mucolytic agent..."

Following that link takes you to the Mucokinetics page, which explains the difference between expectorants and mucolytics:

"An expectorant increases bronchial secretions and mucolytics help loosen thick bronchial secretions. Expectorants reduce the thickness or viscosity of bronchial secretions thus increasing mucus flow that can be removed more easily through coughing. Mucolytics break down the chemical structure of mucus molecules. The mucus becomes thinner and can be removed more easily through coughing."

Under "Function" it states:

"It is secretolytic, increasing the production of serous mucus in the respiratory tract and makes the phlegm thinner and less viscous."

Which to me seems to be the very definition of an expectorant, not a mucolytic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.228.206.180 (talk) 00:34, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Are brand names necessary/allowed
There's a section for brand names and that seems like something that wouldn't be necessary or maybe allowed, but I'm rather new to all this. What's the rules? TiddiesTiddiesTiddies (talk) 18:36, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

I don't see a problem listing brand names, but why are they in current order? Is it a random order?

Here is a huge list of brand names:

https://www.drugs.com/international/bromhexine.html

If Wikipedia lists only some of the brand names, Wikipedia should list the brands that are sold in numerous countries, like Bisolvon:

BB Farma, Italy; Bisa Consumer, Argentina; Boehringer, Peru; Boehringer Ing., Paraguay; Boehringer Ingelheim, Brazil; Boehringer Ingelheim, Chile; Boehringer Ingelheim, Colombia; Boehringer Ingelheim, Germany; Boehringer Ingelheim, Finland; Boehringer Ingelheim, Croatia (Hrvatska); Boehringer Ingelheim, Indonesia; Boehringer Ingelheim, Italy; Boehringer Ingelheim, Kuwait; Boehringer Ingelheim, Mexico; Boehringer Ingelheim, Netherlands; Boehringer Ingelheim, Philippines; Boehringer Ingelheim, Serbia; Boehringer Ingelheim, Sweden; Boehringer Ingelheim, Taiwan; Boehringer Ingelheim, Uruguay; Boehringer Ingelheim, Venezuela; Boehringer Ingelheim, South Africa; Boehringer Ingelheim International, Vietnam; Delpharm Lille, Macedonia; Ecosse, Malta; Farma 1000, Italy; Istituto de Angeli, Macedonia; Merck, Pakistan; NeoFarma, Malta; Pharmazena, Italy; Programmi Sanitari int., Italy; Sanofi, Ireland; Sanofi, Japan; Sanofi Belgium, Belgium; Sanofi Malta, Malta; Sanofi-Aventis, Austria; Sanofi-Aventis, Bosnia & Herzegowina; Sanofi-Aventis, Switzerland; Sanofi-Aventis, France; Sanofi-Aventis, Norway; Sanofi-Aventis SA, Greece; Zydus, India; Sanofi-Aventis, Thailand

--ee1518 (talk) 21:38, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Linkage to vasicine
There was a long standing, but unsourced linkage to vasicine that was removed February 2020:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bromhexine&diff=next&oldid=927564522

I think we all agree that "bromhexine is a synthetic derivative of vasicine", and that the statement was only removed because it was unsourced. I've tried a few times to get the a source to legitimize the link to vasicine, but it keeps getting rejected.

The last source had a publishing date of 1996, and it called bromhexine and ambroxol "semi-synthetic derivatives of vasicine", right in the paper's title, so no question the authors thought that bromhexine was a synthetic derivative of vasicine.

I would like guidance for how to select an article that won't be rejected as support for what I think we can all agree is a fact.--Sengsational (talk) 21:54, 15 November 2020 (UTC)