Talk:Desoxyn

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Desoxyn is part of WikiProject Pharmacology, a project to improve all Pharmacology-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other pharmacology articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance for this Project's importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Please cite references

Are there any studies that back up the claim that Desoxyn is more effective than other meds at treating ADD or is this just one person's opinion? --75.17.140.104 (talk) 03:57, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

There have been numerous, often meta studies, comparing the various AD/HD medications. These studies typically will conclude that across the board, there's an approximately 60-70% success rate, that some patients respond more favorable to one medicine over another, and the only unique distinction that is noteworthy will tend to center around the duration of effect.
Since the present page does not claim it has more or less efficacy than other treatment options, I don't feel this is necessary to document.

[edit] problematic use citations

Dextromethamphetamine hydrochloride is going to replace methamphetamine hydrocloride throughout this article for reasons of consistency until the matter can be discussed further should the change be disputed. The "w/ dextro" form appears more frequently in the article (prior to my edit) and for this reason will take the place of the "w/o dextro" form. I suggest considering either d-amphetamine or dextroamphetamine in addition to these longer forms when they aren't needed. I'm suggesting simplicity and consistency from a reader's standpoint. (Clearisabelle 06:26, 27 March 2007 (UTC))

d-methamphetamine is a shorthand for dextromethamphetamine that is less distracting, IMO. --75.17.140.104 (talk) 03:57, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/505846 supports the claim that most people prescribed medicines for ADHD or ADD do not share and take their medicine as directed - in other words they dont abuse it. It looks like the source is reputable and a cursory google search looks like there are other sources supporting this claim with results coming from cited research.

This is also just a report from a newsbriefing of a scientific assembly. Medical literature generally puts a rather low value on such sources. Any sources from "peer-reviewed" journals on the topic that would support this? RobSansBeard

I don't have the links handy, but there are peer-reviewed sources that confirm that the incidence of abuse when people with ADD/ADHD are treated with stimulants are lower than when they are not. The incidence is still higher than for people without ADD/ADHD, though. As I read the article, it expressed a concern about abuse when people with other conditions are being treated with it, though I suspect a different wording might help to clarify this. Zuiram 05:55, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why is Desoxyn still made?

And why is it still made if we know aobut how addictive it is?

--User:207.163.233.254

Desoxyn is no more "addictive" than any other stimulant. Please note Wikipedia standards do not allow for original research—— as amphetamine studies have a number of conclusive evidence establishing drug addicts and rats cannot differentiate between methylated amphetamine and non-methylated amphetamine, just accept it. Otherwise, the page gets cluttered with needless tangents, and that's annoying and tedious for readers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.237.72.211 (talk) 00:30, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Also, there is no documented "stigma." Again, unless you can prove medical literature is actually saying this, don't edit it. Anecdotal reports from doctors alone is nothing more than original research, and original research is prohibited on Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.237.72.211 (talk) 00:32, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Desoxyn is still produced because it is a highly effective medication for people who suffer from Attention Deficit Disorder or Narcolepsy, for example, among whom abuse of or addiction to the medication is rare.

This is, to me, a silly question resulting from ignorance. Would you have the pharmaceutical companies barred from producing Dilaudid (the most commonly prescribed medication in U.S. hospitals for moderate to severe pain) or codeine, because opiate painkillers have the potential to be addictive? Would you want yourself or your family members to be denied effective medication merely because certain people have an addiction problem?

Every couple of years the news media picks a medication to demonize (see, for example, Oxycontin--which remains one of the most effective tools for relieving chronic pain for sufferers of cancer, injuries, etc, but which was selected for demonization because of modern-day puritanism and therefore has caused many legitimate pain sufferers to be denied this highly effective painkiller); I wouldn't be surprised if Desoxyn soon finds its way on the radar of the modern-day muckrakers, despite the fact that Desoxyn is rare as hens' teeth already, due to the population's current sensitization to the word "methamphetamine."

--Ryanaxp 23:57, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)


The following statement is misleading. All amphetamines are "neurotoxic," if taken in high enough quantities, as this induces hypoxia. Unfortunately, too many people think neurotoxicity can occur without any symptoms, so they read things like this and think their brain is somehow eating itself.

It's clearly nothing within the prescribed ranges for Desoxyn that would induce hypoxia, so how is this remotely relevant to discussions of therapeutic use? Does the flouridation treatment page include discussions of neurotoxicity caused by flouride in drinking water? No. Does flouride cause hypoxia and necrosis in high enough doses? Yes. If it's not relevant to the therapeutic use, please post it on the methamphetamine page instead.

Also, amphetamine isn't quite "neuroprotective." If a study suggests methamphetamine is "neurotoxic," this doesn't mean non-methylated amphetamine— well-established for causing neurotoxicity— isn't. Research grants are simply more prevalent for methamphetamine than amphetamine.

Please refrain from including original research as rationale, even in a talk page. Some confuse conjecture as fact, especially when the conjecture is mentioned on some message board (a link, to undiscerning users, suffices for "support").
Besides the points mentioned above, medical use of amphetamines does not produce the "high" associated with abusing the drugs. Therefore, you don't build up an addiction to them. In fact, those that take stimulants as children are actually less likely to abuse them as adults.

It is worth noting that methamphetamines, unlike amphetamines, can be neurotoxic. This probably contributes to Desoxyn being prescribed only as a second choice. Should that be mentioned in the article?Crazy Wolf 18:14, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Amphetamines are generally not all that addictive in recreational use, either. Cutting nicotine is way harder than cutting amphetamines, according to everyone I know that has tried both, and in my own experience there is no difficulty in discontinuing therapeutic use of amphetamines.
As to neurotoxicity, all amphetamines, as well as methylphenidate, have the potential to be neurotoxic. There are ways to avoid this problem, but that's too complicated to get into here.
The reason it's a second line therapy is exclusively the fact that there is a significant baggage attached to the term "methamphetamine", even more so than for regular amphetamine.
Zuiram 06:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Desoxyn is prescribed when people have bad side effects from the other amphetamines mainly. This has to do with stigma, and just a lack of knowledge by doctors on it. My doc, didn't even know what desoxyn was until I told him. It also has no time release form (hasn't for over 5 yrs) which is all the rage to have now with these other medicines. BTW, it;s a misconception that amphetamines are liek tranquilizers to those with ADD/ADHD, or that they won't get high on them. It's that this high, the amphetamine stimulation helps them to focus like it would anyone else. They just need this focusing ability more.

Actually, at doses below 25-30mg (regular amphetamine) or 15-20mg (methamphetamine), you will not get a "high" from them in the sense that most people connect with that word. The only kind of "high" you will get from them at therapeutic doses is comparable to the "high" you get from lots of coffee and chocolate. And while they do not work like tranquilizers, they do reduce agitation if the optimal dosage is used. In some cases, a somewhat higher dosage is used to improve cognitive function. Zuiram 06:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Methamphetamine is no more neurotoxic than amphetamine. In any case, it's not neurotoxic at the doses used for AD(H)D. Recreational dosages that may cause brain damage (though this is still far from certain - methamphetamine is certainly neurotoxic if you give enough of it to lab animals, but how those doses scale to those that humans take is unknown) are many times larger than those used for therapeutic purposes. A lot, if not most or almost all of the neurotoxicity associated with substance abuse is the result of nutrient deficiency (as in alcoholism) or impurities associated with illicit manufacture (most notoriously MPTP in a batch of 'synthetic heroin'). By way of comparison, it's as if one were to observe only the most hard-core alcoholics - those that drink upwards of a fifth of hard liquor every day, say - and see the obvious negative effect on their life it's had and the brain damage it's caused, and then to ask why alcoholic beverages are still on the market since they could theoretically do the same thing to anyone that drank them. Desoxyn is a second-line (probably more like third- or fourth-line for most providers) treatment because of the tremendous stigma attached to illicit methamphetamine use. It's a shame, too, because it's a great treatment for AD(H)D as the article describes.
Also, I came across a case report of a child who was allergic to the dyes used in all other formulations of stimulant medications on the market in the US. His doctor put him on Desoxyn gradumet because it wasn't dyed. As far as I know, it didn't send him hurtling inexorably towards a path to drug abuse and ruin or turn him into a drooling vegetable any more than dexedrine or ritalin would have. If I ever find it I'll list it.
Porkchopmcmoose 23:27, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

-I used to have a prescription for desoxyn. It has less side effects then adderall, dexedrine, and ritalin (I took all of them), and when it wheres off, you don't have the same deppresion that those others create. I volunatraily stopped taking after awhile, b/c I wanted to deal on my own. It was the best of all the ADHD medications I took. You also need a much smaller amount. methamphetamine has been demonized by society, while at the same time this society pumps it's youths full of other amphetamines that were demonized before like benzedrine (now just with dexedrine mixed in as adderall. 2 amphetamines instead of just the 1???)

[edit] Merge

I'm proposing a merge, because most of the information presented here is identical to the information in the methamphetamine article. Desoxyn is the brand name for pharmaceutical grade methamphetamine. I'm sure there is a generic version available by this point, so it seems like a good idea to merge this with the Medical Use section of the meth article. Fuzzform 20:05, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

I would whole-heartedly disagree with a merge, as the methamphetamine article is almost exclusively concerned with its illicit use contra its legitimate pharmacological applications Li3crmp 02:28, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Li3crmp is absoulutely right, Desoyxn is a perscribed drug. This article is fine where it stands. Calicore 15:04, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree, that would be akin (almost) to merging the morphine article with the herion article. This has to do with the legal script, and it needs to be understood as such. Otherwise, all desoxyn users become methamphetamine addicts when people go to look up this medication.

  • All valid points. Keep. Ritalin has also been abused widely, but when prescribed for an ADD patient has positive results. inhuman14 2:37, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
The consensus seems to be to keep the article as is, and do not merge with methamphetamine. As such, I'll be bold and remove the merge template from this article. -- SwissCelt 15:09, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to reintroduce the idea of merging. First off, heroin and morphine are not the same drug, so I'm not sure how much value this argument has. A more valid comparison would be Ritalin and methylphenidate. In this case, Ritalin redirects to methylphenidate. The same would apply to Desoxyn; perhaps this content could be incorporated into the methamphetamine article. Andrew73 17:40, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

'keep'
Heroin becomes morphine in the brain. It just happens to have an acetyl group which eases the passage through the blood-brain barrier.
The primary use of methylphenidate is therapeutic, under the brand ritalin. The primary use of racemic methamphetamine is recreational. The primary use of d-methamphetamine is therapeutic, under the brand desoxyn.
A user looking for the methylphenidate article and a user looking for the ritalin article are generally both looking for the same information. A user looking for the desoxyn article is generally looking for the therapeutic use information, while a user looking for the methamphetamine article is generally looking for the recreational use information.
Dextroamphetamine, generally sold under the brand dexedrine, is usually used therapeutically, and is a better comparison yet. Based on its model, we could move this page to dextromethamphetamine, and have desoxyn redirect there. But merging it with methamphetamine is no more useful than merging dextroamphetamine with amphetamine.
Desoxyn is not even the same as methamphetamine, since it is not racemic. There are several articles on Wikipedia that set a precedent for keeping the racemic and single-enantiomer versions of the same drug seperate.
In short, merging would reduce the utility of both articles for the people reading it, while gaining no measure of consistency and offering only marginal improvement in conceptual organization.
Zuiram 06:17, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge!!

Merge them :)

19:07, 8 May 2006 (UTC)


Well, I'm not too sure about merging them. The methamphetamine article is a mess. It is unorganized and sloppy. I think a fix of the methamphetamine article would be due first before the merge.

Desoxyn is pharmaceutical methamphetamine HCl.

Refault 21:50, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

It can still be merged and fixed later. Ultimately, pharmaceutical grade methamphetamine is a subset of methamphetamine (good and bad uses), and hence it doesn't need a separate article. Andrew73 21:51, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
Methamphetamine is 43 KB. It's too big as it is and doesn't need more content. I see no harm in leaving this article be. Same drug: different angles and different purposes.
On the grounds that they are the same then I'll point out Ethanol, Alcoholic beverage, & Ethanol fuel. By you logic we should merge all three into one big happy article. Same drug: different angles and different purposes. Nevermind each article is pushing the upper limit on size and a combined size would be upwards of 100 KB.
I also disagree with your approach of "merge and deal with it later." Nothing like making your decision someone else's problem, eh? Cburnett 05:39, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
The difference is that methamphetamine and Desoxyn are the same thing. Likewise, there isn't a separate article for Ritalin and methylphenidate. On the other hand, the analogy with alcoholic beverage and ethanol fuel isn't perfect. I don't think you'd be making a screwdriver with ethanol fuel! Andrew73 13:05, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
So you're contending that ethanol is different than the ethanol in beer and the ethanol in in gasohol? Ethanol isn't ethanol which isn't ethanol? You've lost me how ethanol can be different in three ways. Cburnett 00:54, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
No I'm not arguing that ethanol doesn't equal ethanol. I just wanted to emphasize that the final product (alcoholic beverage v. gasahol) is different. On the other hand, Desoxyn and methamphetamine are the same final product (okay besides the pills being labeled differently and perhaps different filler ingredients in the tablets). I'm just arguging for consistency with other articles about drugs (e.g. there are no separate articles for Valium or Ativan, etc., etc. Andrew73 11:51, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
Good, I was worried there for a second. Again, meth and desoxyn have very different uses and that's what separates them. Meth, by all media counts, is a huge street drug problem. I can't say that I've heard valium included on the war on drugs. Ethanol in beer and gasohol have two very different purposes despite a strong commonality. Meth (street drug) and desoxyn (ADHD) have two very different purposes despite a strong commonality. And, again, meth article is oversized as it is and needs stuff pulled out of it not into it. Cburnett 04:25, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
Okay, Valium isn't a great example. A better example would be OxyContin, which is used both legally and as a street drug. However, there isn't a separate article on OxyContin, just an article on oxycodone which is the main ingredient. While the methamphetamine article may be oversized, I imagine that there is a way to reduce its size and include relevant commentary on its uses in ADHD. Andrew73 11:58, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
Yes, there is inconsistency on WP between drugs and their brand names and/or alternative uses. (Mostly because of deletionist-minded people like you, I'll add :), that seek to merge articles that relate some how despite being different, but I digress majorly.)
Technically, if Desoxyn becomes a redirect you have no way to jump them to a specific heading detailing Desoxyn, what exactly "Desoxyn" is, etc. Nor can alcoholic beverage be able to jump you to a section in ethanol. In addition to my other reasons there is the user perspective of "What is Desoxyn? ... why the heck am on a page about meth?!" This then requires the introduction to methamphetamine to pull double duty and explain two concepts (one a drug, one a brand name drug). What is contained within the Desoxyn pill is meth but "Desoxyn" is not meth. It's a brand name and the drug has a use outside the scope of meth the drug.
Having just checked, I still haven't seen you propose a merger between ethanol, alcoholic beverage, and ethanol fuel despite the latter two containing ethanol (precisely like how Desoxyn contains meth). I don't see how you intend on having your cake and eating it too. Point out OxyContin if you wish but you have yet to resolve my ethanol questions:
  • Is alcohol (aka booze) the same as ethanol? No.
  • Is ethanol fuel (aka gasohol) the same as ethanol? No.
  • Is ethanol in booze and gasohol? Yup.
  • Is OxyContin the same as oxycodone? No.
  • Is percocet the same as oxycodone? No.
  • Is percodan the same as oxycodone? No. (Also explain how percodan has its own article and percocet doesn't.)
  • Is oxycodone in OxyContin, Percocet, & Percodan? Yup.
  • Is Desoxyn the same as meth? No.
  • Is meth in Desoxyn? Yup.
I'm having problems how your logic & argument can differ on this and use OxyContin/oxycodone (while completely ignoring the inconsistency with all the brand drugs that use oxycodone) as your reference when it parallels booze/ethanol. Cburnett 23:52, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay, this is getting amusing. I think we can agree that Desoxyn is a branded version of methamphetamine. As with nearly all drugs in Wikipedia, the brand names redirect to the generic name. Just because methamphetamine is mainly known for its abuse doesn't mean that the "legal" branded version should have its own article.

You've already stated above why alcohol, ethanol fuel, and alcoholic beverage should have separate articles given the differences. You can drink an alcoholic beverage, but you can't drink ethanol fuel. In contrast, you can give an individual both methamphetamine and Desoxyn since they're the same thing.

OxyContin and oxycodone share the same active ingredient, oxycodone. That's why Oxycontin redirects to cxycodone. Vicodin and hydrocodone are not the same thing since Vicodin includes both hydrocodone and acetaminophen. Similarly, Percocet is not necessarily the same as oxycodone, since Percocet also includes acetaminophen, though of note, Percocet does redirect to oxycodone.

Finally, I don't see how Desoxyn and methamphetamine can be different enough to justify separate articles. It would be like saying deux is not the same as two.

In any event, I'll ask others [1], [2] what they think. Andrew73 03:46, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I suppose if your only concern is chemical difference then I can see that until you consider:
  • Vicodin/Hydroco have their own articles; Lorcet/lortab/zydone/anexsia/maxidone/etc. redirects to hydrocodone
  • Percodan has its own article; percocet redirects to oxycodone
  • Synthroid has its own article but is the same as Levothyroxine
  • filgrastim/Neupogen has its own article; pegfilgrastim/Neulasta redirects to G-CSF; Dynepo has its own article
  • Tylenol and acetaminophen have their own separate articles (granted Tylenol is brand for a slew of drugs, but acetaminophen is the main ingredient in all of them)
Gah, my head hurts... Cburnett 06:56, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
On the point made above by Andrew73 re Desoxyn and meth being intersubsitutable, unlike say alcohol to drink and ethanol fuel: they are not, in the end, intersusbsitutable as what I might buy on the streets as meth and what I take as a prescription medication might bare less in common with one another than the alcohol example suggests. Certainly the effects and uses are very different, one used recreationally the other medicinally, etc. Li3crmp 18:28, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Darn. I obviously replied to the wrong "Merge" section. I won't reiterate everything here, but Desoxyn is the same as dextromethamphetamine, so moving it to that name would be consistent with Wikipedia precedents. It is not, however, the same as racemic methamphetamine, and merging it with that article would not be consistent. For the closest analog, Dexedrine redirects to dextroamphetamine, which is a seperate article from amphetamine.

Also, the audience for the two articles is different, and the net utility of the content will drop as a result of a merge. I'm firmly opposed. Zuiram 06:27, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RFC for merging

  • Another response to the RfC. I would tend to agree with AED that a merge would be best. However, Cburnett seems to have come up with a bunch of articles that don't follow this convention so in the interest of consistency, you would have to say they should also be merged. Trebor 12:04, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge it. It's no different from any other metamphetamine preparation. JFW | T@lk 13:26, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Another vote for Merging them. --WS 14:20, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
  • I vote to merge: having seperate articles for two different names of the same thing is just silly. Ce1984 06:17, 3 June [*] 2006 (UTC)
  • (Don't merge) You know, I'm an ADD sufferer and I came to this article searching for information on the ADD medication Desoxyn after I saw it mentioned in a forum post. I had no idea it was methamphetamine, and would be confused if I suddenly got redirected to the meth article.

    Furthermore, people (like me) searching for Desoxyn are searching for it's use as an ADD medication and don't give a crap about the illicit uses of meth. If redirected, we would have to find the part of that article that dealt with it's use as an ADD drug, and the rest of the text would just be wasted space on the screen. I'd imagine it would work the other way around for people looking up methamphetamine. It's enough to leave the two as-is and have links between them.

    How about you quit obsessing about efficiency and categorization and let a few KB of similar information exist in separate articles for the sake of readability? You may not realize this, but it's just plain mean to throw several pages of irrelevant information at an ADD sufferer! Cl4y 22:32, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

The audience of this article isn't targeted at a specific group. There are plenty of articles on Wikipedia that have information that may not be directly relevant to a user's inquiry. Just because one group doesn't find it relevant doesn't mean that a completely separate article should be created. Andrew73 12:07, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Don't merge. ackoz 08:43, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Don't merge--212.56.109.125 08:05, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
Either of you care to give any reasons? Trebor 18:26, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
See above--212.56.109.125 17:15, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Don't merge. Rename/move this as the main article of medicinal use of methamphetamine and as the main article from the methamphetamine on this topic. The methamphetamine article is long enough and a squib about Desoxyn being the prescription name and a link to this as the main article should be enough. All those who want to merge it though not because they're following the rules-I do think most people who want to merge this legitimately want to follow convention, that said, I have a sneaking suspecion that this page is highlighted because it is methamphetamine. Pick on adderall and the whole medicinal marijuana article and even conspiracy theories about anything and merge them to their main articles. It'd make wikipedia unreadable. Main articles should link to necessary articles and include a squib about the needed subject as general information only. The advantages of this setup is you find exactly what you're looking for and you don't have to read through a lot of unneeded information. The disadvantage is it will slow down wikipedia and take up space.J. M. 01:19, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
  • (Merge) I'm not necessarily a stickler for rules or conventions, but nearly every other article in Wikipeidia about drugs that have both legitimate and illegitimate uses are subsumed under the generic name. Methamphetamine/Desoxyn should not be any different. Andrew73 01:51, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Don't merge. An exception to a good rule & per cl4y. Outriggr 23:42, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Don't merge. Even if it is, technically, Wikipedia policy to redirect brand names to chemical names, in this case it seems to lead to confusion. Certainly the legitimate medicinal uses of Desoxyn are currently swamped in the Meth article. As the two articles currently stand, they are sufficiently wikified and hyperlinked to make their relationship transparent while allowing this important distinction to be made.Li3crmp 04:14, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Don't merge. As stated above, there are good reasons to make exceptions to the general rule, and this qualifies at least because of the societal distinctions between methamphetamine in general and Desoxyn specifically (regardless of the fact that pharmacologically, they refer to the same active substance). --Ryanaxp 17:49, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Don't merge. I have to agree with previous comments about the main meth page. It is written to discuss and show the illicit uses of methamphetamine, and has little mention beyond a simple sentence about Desoxyn. To merge this article into the main meth page would only add to the clutter, and to the confusion. Until the main meth page is cleaned, I think that the article should remain seperate. Sirwilliam 07:29, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Don't merge. With all the hype and media attention surrounding methamphetamine (crystal meth), there should be a spotlight for the pharmaceutical versions of methamphetamine along with the illicit. As with Adderall, Benzedrine, and Dexedrine for amphetamine, Desoxyn has a huge difference from methamphetamine they have different chemical bonds and effect you in different ways (just like MDMA and Methamphetamine are different) and both made for totally different purposes. Do you really think DEA would just let people have methamphetamines legally? Hell no, what's wrong with you people; misinformation is what the promlem is, dont beleive everything you read.-- John Cho 05:05, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Actually, the whole point of this arcticle is that its a legal, DEA use for methamphetamine, the same drug. That's why its schedule II, not schedule I.68.161.21.40 20:25, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Don't merge. The methamphetamine article is a mess and focus too much on illicit use.
Actually, it's not the same drug, and here's why: no street d-desoxyephederine exists. None. Abbot Labs had a lab researcher spend his entire career perfecting the process into the 1960's. Meth cooks download a recipe off Usenet, which is modified to the whim of whatever available form of oven cleaner and ammonia is available. Moreover, the FDA initially referred to the drug as "desoxyephederine," not "methamphetamine."
The change occurred so that the drug would appear next to the other amphetamines when M.D.'s looked what weight loss drug to prescribe in the Physicians Desk Reference, back when amphetamines were seen as cure-alls, and approved (as Desoxyn was) for hay fever, etc.
Having a drug of abuse merge with a pharmaceutical page is absurd. How many books out there on methamphetamine bother to discuss the clinical efficacy of Desoxyn? As far as I'm concerned, anyone proposing to merge the two is also proposing to merge every single other drug that is a controlled substance on Wikipedia. It's not going to happen, so let's consider this thread closed and move on— the discussion has clearly represented a majority consensus strongly opposed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Informer0 (talk • contribs) 22:27, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Desoxyn Support Group