David Goodman wrote: > I notice that in several survey the information that most physicians > regret Wikipedia not having is information on standard dosage, > information that we have made the policy decision to omit. > I think this a particularly stupid decision. For current drugs, the > information is standardized and available from the authoritative > source--the official drug information. It's not a matter of > unsupported opinion, it's pertinent, and the sources are impeccable. > (Giving the variation in actual dosage used, or giving historical > does, is another matter, though there are sometimes sources for that > also). The general reason given is that WP is not a source of medical > advice. No, but it is and should be a source of reliable medical > information. The range of official usual dose is a fact, and can be > reported. > > Well, I imagine we can link to this information if it is online; and I imagine the disclaimers about following such advice in self-medicating or (feels queasy here) treating others are better left on some other site. I'm also uneasy at taking US-centric medical advice as normative. It is simply not the case that prescribing is an international standard, I believe. Body mass index must have some relevance. And so on. David has a point in that certain official recommendations could be presented as such, as verifiable facts. I would be alarmed even about physicians consulting an editable site such as WP about such key numbers.
Charles _______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l