Talk:Nitazoxanide

Did the drug company write this entry? An "impressive series of controlled trials"? Pleease. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Walker.andrew (talk • contribs) 12:01, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

NTZ isnt' a prodrug..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.111.190.9 (talk) 03:04, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Improvements

I'm working to improve this page, as it is still under need of a lot of improvment. There is a lot of information about clinical trials that have ended, some recently. If anyone wants to help clain up the clinical trials that would be a lot of help. There are several statements that are not well sourced. I'm not sure I can handle all of this myself but I will be doing what I can.Hardkhora (talk) 19:40, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

The Hepatitis C uses must have become much less important now that specific Hepatitis C antivirals are nearly 100% effective. Tslumley (talk) 07:30, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Fixed an incorrectly entered reference

An editor tried to jam the citation into the reflist section, I kludged it into the proper place, but I'm not exceptionally good at entering citations. Anyone want to help clean that up? Thanks.Wzrd1 (talk) 16:45, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Antiviral?

I noticed that in 2016, the claim that nitazoxanide is a "broad-spectrum antiviral" was added. What's the current status of this drug? Based on a limited search, it appears that nitazoxanide may show in vitro activity but is still considered experimental in humans for diseases caused by viruses. Shouldn't there be some clarification of the "broad-spectrum antiviral" claim? ScienceFlyer (talk) 19:47, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

The publication supporting the claim that nitazoxanide is a "broad-spectrum antiviral" is authored by an employee of the same company developing the drug as an anti-viral. The conflict of interest doesn't necessarily invalidate the reference, but I think it's worth noting. ScienceFlyer (talk) 20:36, 1 March 2023 (UTC)