| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fospropofol article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
 | Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Fospropofol.
|
July 2008
editi am concerned that the general tone of this page is too commercial and too pro fospropofol in the absence of either data or clinical experience. the text assserts 'advantages' etc which are non evidenced Robert Sneyd —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.163.84.17 (talk) 12:29, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
As of today's federal register this is a newly proposed US DEA Schedule IV drug. The comment period ends August 24, 2009. The legal status should be updated then.66.166.38.18 (talk) 15:32, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Retractions
editGiven the dangers and the investigators' retraction of much of the original source data, I've hidden the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics sections. It needs careful reexamination and source review before reintroduction. LeadSongDog come howl! 20:03, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
- Wer die Flöhe husten hört, sollte sich langsam nach einem Psychiater umsehen!;D — Preceding unsigned comment added by FK1954 (talk • contribs) 20:37, 3 August 2023 (UTC)