Talk:Loperamide

Breasfeeding contradiction?
At the beginning of the article it states that It appears to be safe in breastfeeding.. However, later on, the following is stated: Loperamide can be present in breast milk, and is not recommended for breast feeding mothers.. One of the sources may be wrong or wrongly explained in the article. Richard Wolf VI (talk) 04:29, 3 March 2018 (UTC)


 * This is not uncommon nor a contradiction. Consider; The appearance of safety and the recommendation to expose something to an infant is common with many non-medicine products as well. The liability related to pharmaceuticals is astronomical as well is product safety of non-medicine in relation to children and infants. Medical information is generally the product of published and nonpublished scientific studies, which are based on the results of an experiment as observed by the experimenter, this is where language like "appears to be safe in" is most common. VarsityEagleScout (talk) 00:11, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Off-label use: anal sex
before deleting the sentence on anal sex, I read the sources, and I quote the author of one: The views in this slideshow do not reflect those of The Advocate and are based solely on my own experiences, so a primary source. The other source appears to be a blog, so not WP:RS, either. Something more reliable should be found if you think the statement should stay. And what happened to WP:BRD?  Tony Holkham   (Talk)  14:53, 13 August 2021 (UTC)


 * I take your point. But surely the purpose of WP:BRD is to avoid unreliable statements? It doesn't say that a named article can never be used, but they are "rarely reliable for statements of fact". The fact we are trying to establish here is that someone has suggested its off label use for anal sex. So I think the article, published in a national magazine, advocating that off-label use does meet the hurdle of a reliable statements of fact. (And I don't think it is a primary source once the editor has selected it for the magazine and edited it.) Dan88888 (talk) 17:09, 13 August 2021 (UTC)


 * The issue was WP:RS. I didn't think it was satisfied in either source, and gave my reasons, but you disagree, despite taking my point, so we may as well leave it at that.  Tony Holkham   (Talk)  18:50, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree on one of the sources. I take your point that The Advocate article is the opinion of one person, as is the case for any editorial piece. WP:RS gives examples of this. So we have a reliable source establishing that one person has publicly advocated the use of loperamide for anal sex. So as long as we don't make a claim that says more than this, we satisfy WP:RS. Unless I am missing something. Dan88888 (talk) 12:53, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

I edited my previous statement as it occured to me that; As a laxative, it is used to reduce the frequency and watery consistency of bowel movements and associated cramps. Whether it's 'for' going to church or anal sex it's not an off-label use. Consider a source containing 'I suggest Xanax for family visits and funerals' is suggesting it's labeled anxiolytic use. VarsityEagleScout (talk) 16:28, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Likely Unrelated 'See Also' links
The listing of methylnaltrexone and naloxogel under the See Also heading seems to be misplaced here as these are listed as "another synthetic peripheral opioid antagonist but loperamide is a peripherally acting amtagonist. I'd like to edit this and replace it with another sourced drug in the category of the latter if a peripherally acting opioid agonist other than those mentioned can be found.

side effects
the current text reads hi doses may result in cardiac syptoms (these can be very serious) however, it isn't clear that these are very high doses; >150 mg/day (~ 75 tablets !!!) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25645123/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31432581/

I think this should be noted !! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.245.17.105 (talk) 19:13, 10 May 2022 (UTC)