Talk:Amlodipine/atorvastatin

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Amlodipine/atorvastatin article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

Pharmacology Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

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 Amlodipine/atorvastatin.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

"Controversy" section

I've removed the "Controversy" section which suggests that combination drugs are "money grabs". This information is more a criticism of Fixed dose combination in general (and I note that similar information is already a part of that article). Additionally, the section was completely unreferenced and made several dubious claims. If you want to re-add the information, please provide proof and explain specifically how it relates to Caduet. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 21:36, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Caduet is a combination of two medications, amlodipine, whose patent has recently expired, and atorvastatin, whose patent expires in March of 2010. By combining the two into a single dosage unit, Pfizer is able to receive a new patent valid until August 2018, and thus charge a premium for drugs which would otherwise be cheaply available. If this is not an obvious abuse of the FDA regulations, I don't know what is. With this kind of behavior, it could become accepted practice to patent any effective drug combination in order to simply generate more profit. Hydrocodone and carisoprodol are both effective for back pain relief, Hey, let's toss them both in a pill and call it Spinogesic! Then we could charge twice as much as the price of both combined! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.217.128.225 (talk) 03:24, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Unless you can provide some proof in reliable sources of a controversy surrounding Caduet, that section shouldn't be re-added. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 03:30, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here[[1]] is a Wall Street Journal article outlining Pfizer's plan to switch Norvasc users to Caduet in order to increase profits. Here[[2] is a Washington Post article also relating to the marketing ploy. I'm not making this stuff up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.217.3.165 (talk) 15:34, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]