Talk:Sulfonamide

Latest comment: 18 years ago by Ben.c.roberts in topic Propose disambig page

Untitled

edit

In the second paragraph the text says "break the German patent." The word break should be changed to "infringe." You cannot "break" a patent, you can only "infringe" a patent. I am posting this as a disscussion because I would like to know what those who are not patent savvy think about the word "infringe."

Still Used Today?

edit

Request someone insert info regarding whether sulfa or sulfa powder is still used in the medical field in the current day. TKarrde 20:01, 15 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

In the US, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole is the only commonly used sulfa antimicrobial. Textbooks mention that sulfa drugs are still commonly used in third world countries because of their low cost, but I have no direct experience regarding this. Osmodiar 01:51, 16 January 2006 (UTC)Reply
Veterinarians in the US commonly use sulfadimethoxine for the treatment of coccidiosis. --Joelmills 21:35, 8 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

sulfa drugs

edit

Would sodium sulfacetamide, commonly used today in rx preparations, be considered a sulfa drug?

Yes, sulfacetamide is a member of the group. -- ben

Propose disambig page

edit

I'm more into pharmacy than chemistry, and as a drug group I always call the antibacterial sulfonamides just "sulfonamides." The functional group chemistry and the drug info are pretty far apart form each other, but they both fit under the same name, in my opinion. I suggest that the Sulfonamide page be made a disambig page and this one moved to something like Sulfonamide (chemistry). Thoughts? -- ben 14:46, 26 July 2006 (UTC)Reply

Yes, there is already a sulfa drug page. My problem is that sulfonamide refers quite explicitly to the group of antibacterial drugs when used in a medical context, and that the page on the functional group chemistry is mostly irrelevant when searching for medical articles. A disambiguation page that could point people either way would be quite appropriate, I think. -- ben 17:37, 28 July 2006 (UTC)Reply