Talk:Etoricoxib

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 07:52, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Etoricoxib. 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/20080406201636/http://www.emea.europa.eu/pdfs/human/press/pr/20776605en.pdf to http://www.emea.europa.eu/pdfs/human/press/pr/20776605en.pdf

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) 23:40, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Bias?
This article reads like it was written by a pharmaceutical company representative. It does not mention cardiovascular effects under the adverse effects section, only mentions it under the history section as a property of other, withdrawn, COX-2 inhibitors rather than a property of COX-2 selective inhibitors in general.

If this drug is proposed to have diminished risk, that's fine. But no claim of this is made, either actively or passively. Rather, it is strongly implicated by the conspicuous wording of the risk assessment of those other drugs. This reads to me like a strong attempt at manipulating the audience.

Any thoughts on this?

--143.206.195.178 (talk) 07:10, 29 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Absolutely, it reads as having been written by the lab. Would you agree adding a bias tag to this? 2800:40:39:1F85:5066:9F5D:280D:70F4 (talk) 11:25, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I strongly disagree. This article merely mentions the medical use of a drug, its adverse effects as would be found on a medication label, and its brand names. JoeBo82 (talk) 00:39, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Warning: The formula is incorrect and lacks non-trivial information
In short, the depicted formula is incomplete. See https://pubchem.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/compound/9925991 HorrorIpsvm (talk) 16:04, 15 February 2023 (UTC)