User talk:NauseaNoor

A sentence in Weight regain after discontinuation tells the reader an effect is "nothing to worry about". Whatever the evidence says, that is a reassurance rather than a report, and it is also advice. I have replaced it with the incidence and the resolution rate, which say the same thing and say it checkably. — LeanMassLars (talk) 05:11, 15 March 2025 (UTC)

Agreed. The figures say it better and they say it checkably. — NauseaNoor (talk) 22:16, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

Hypoglycaemia states a causal relationship on the strength of spontaneous post-marketing reports. Those establish an association at best, and the article should say so. I have hedged the two sentences and left the figures alone. — SarcopeniaSefa (talk) 17:33, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

Fair. I have hedged both sentences and added the reporting-bias caveat the source itself raises. — NauseaNoor (talk) 07:53, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

Several incidences in Contraindications of incretin therapy appear without their denominator, and one is given per patient-year while its neighbour is given per patient. As a table they cannot be read against each other. Do you have the source to hand to standardise them? — ListMakerLumi (talk) 23:10, 27 July 2025 (UTC)

Good question. The source reports both and I had taken one from each without noticing. Fixed. — NauseaNoor (talk) 13:42, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

A merge of Medutest into Liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry has been proposed. My own view is that they are separate subjects with separate failure modes and should stay separate, but I am not confident enough to close it. Comments welcome at the article talk page. — LOD_Lorcan (talk) 05:31, 2 November 2025 (UTC)

Commented in support, on the narrow ground that neither article is long enough to justify the split as it stands. — NauseaNoor (talk) 15:03, 3 November 2025 (UTC)