Talk:Development and discovery of SSRI drugs

NPOV for "What came after SSRIs?" section
This section reads like a puff piece, and the timeline image contains information that might be more useful if it were incorporated into the body of the article. I don't edit very often, but I'm guessing that there's some sort of policy for dealing with edits that contain some useful encyclopedic content but violate NPOV enough to basically serve as ads for a product? Would it be reasonable to just delete the entire section, since the article is about SSRIs and not SNRIs? In the meantime I'm just going to edit it to sound less like ad copy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.16.165.159 (talk) 06:32, 19 June 2016 (UTC)


 * yes, that whole section should be deleted. It is copy-pasted from a drug-selling website. 2604:3D08:778A:2400:D805:6F28:D1C7:1713 (talk) 03:02, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Development and discovery of SSRI drugs. 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 tag to ://WOS
 * Added tag to ://WOS:000084313900002
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121215070930/http://drugtopics.modernmedicine.com/drugtopics/data/articlestandard//drugtopics/252011/727243/article.pdf to http://drugtopics.modernmedicine.com/drugtopics/data/articlestandard/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:45, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Development and discovery of SSRI drugs. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20131019115232/http://www.benthamscience.com/open/topsyj/articles/V001/42TOPSYJ.pdf to http://www.benthamscience.com/open/topsyj/articles/V001/42TOPSYJ.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:02, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

very biased
seems very in favor of ssris 2600:1010:B056:BAD5:611A:597E:5176:66CB (talk) 21:59, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. Reads like pharmaceutical company propaganda. Pupperpawz (talk) 20:48, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

3D structure of SERT
In the Binding of SSRIs to SERT protein section, there is this interjected "Update" sentence: "The three-dimensional (3D) structure of SERT is not known and has been the main obstacle for elucidation of the structural mechanism of the human SERT. Update: X-ray crystallography data is available as of 2017 it seems (https://www.rcsb.org/structure/6AWO)..." Integrating the linked data and editing surrounding context based on that data is beyond my scope of knowledge, if anyone is able to fix that interjection. Kimen8 (talk) 22:33, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Modern research has disproved the chemical imbalance hypothesis
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41380-022-01661-0.

The serotonin imbalance in the brain hypothesis has long since been debunked, but is referenced repeatedly in this article. The entire article should be re-written to no longer suggest that low activity or low levels of serotonin result in depression, and that SSRIs help by adjusting that balance: that is nonsense and fake science.

This entire article is a bloody advertisement for the pharmaceutical industry. What a joke! 2604:3D08:778A:2400:D805:6F28:D1C7:1713 (talk) 03:05, 10 November 2023 (UTC)