Talk:Leuprorelin

Quack treatment
Unless a quack treatment is undergoing clinical trials, it should not be listed for fear that it would suggest that it is accepted practice.--Chrispounds 15:16, 22 October 2006 (UTC)
 * May be better to mention it (if widely advertised or used - hence notable) but mention any criticism of it and lack of support from medical community ? - Rod57 (talk) 12:23, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Leuprolide against autism?
http://www.chicagotribune.com/health/chi-autism-lupron-may21,0,242705.story?page=1

Should this be mentioned anywhere? I think it is pure quack medicine in this regard, but people may find some use out of the information on Wikipedia if a little more research is performed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kumorifox (talk • contribs) 18:40, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't mean to sound offensive but this info feels ill fit for the article. Obviously autism isn't "curable" since it is a developmental disorder akin to mental retardation. I don't think the section about "Lupron protocol" is necessary. It just adds to confusion in a Lupron article since said medication is actively used for other purposes. Perhaps it would better fit in articles about autism since similar claims have been made about vaccinations and autism and possibly other medications. "Autism junk science" is more of a autism related phenomenon. 2001:14BA:2F8:F700:4879:6856:45E8:C189 (talk) 14:59, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Is it only available/approved as the acetate
Are any other forms than the acetate : patented, clinically tested, approved, used ? - Rod57 (talk) 12:19, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Text
The drug was the subject of a misinformation campaign which attributed the deaths of thousands of transgender youth to its use to delay puberty when The Daily Wire published an article claiming the drug caused thousands of deaths Transgender Puberty Blocking Drug Linked To Thousands Of Deaths, FDA Data Reveals https://www.dailywire.com/news/transgender-puberty-blocking-drug-linked-to-thousands-of-deaths-fda-data-reveals?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=mattwalsh


 * This source is not notable. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 08:49, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

FDA FAERS Public Dashboard https://fis.fda.gov/sense/app/d10be6bb-494e-4cd2-82e4-0135608ddc13/sheet/45beeb74-30ab-46be-8267-5756582633b4/state/analysis


 * This is just the adverse effect search engine?

without disclosing its usage in cancer treatment.


 * This just discuses its use for cancer? Nothing about a disinformation campaign. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 08:49, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Medical Uses Section Awkward
The medical uses section is wordy and hard to follow. Would it be better in some other format? 24.91.127.241 (talk) 01:39, 23 December 2023 (UTC)


 * I don't see what's wrong with it. It is logically grouped into paragraphs by similar application; there is no section header for each use because they consist of a sentence or two, and so I think having them be separate paragraphs is sufficient. How would you change it? Kimen8 (talk) 01:41, 23 December 2023 (UTC)