| Revision as of 21:17, 5 August 2007 view sourceBadgettrg (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,113 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:22, 6 August 2007 view source Wiseoldowl (talk | contribs)86 edits →Time for DiscussionNext edit → | ||
| (11 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 109: | Line 109: | ||
| I have a hard time explaining this idea. Is the idea that is linked above seem intelligible? Thanks ] 21:17, 5 August 2007 (UTC) | I have a hard time explaining this idea. Is the idea that is linked above seem intelligible? Thanks ] 21:17, 5 August 2007 (UTC) | ||
| ==Time for Discussion== | |||
| You have shown significant interest in certain articles. I think it would be a good idea to discuss this graph with MastCell. | |||
| ] | |||
| ] 03:56, 6 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :To be truthful, I have no idea what you are talking about. I think you are trying to draw me into a discussion similar to the one I was conducting with {{User|Jtclemens}} in June last year. At that point, this user was trying to convince me that there was such a clinical entity as "statin-induced myopathy with normal CPK levels and elevated triglycerides" (SIM-ETL). The only ] he could provide was an article he had written himself in a local paper. That was not very impressive. | |||
| :I am not a statin apologist, but I am weary of the fact that so many people make poorly sustainable claims just because a class of drugs is rather effective at something that was previously so difficult to achieve (modify cardiovascular morbidity and mortality). You never hear these noises about ] (which has much more dangerous side effects if prescribed inappropriately) and ], to name some commonly-used drugs. | |||
| :If you want me to comment on this, I suggest you provide a bit more information. What is your POV, and what do you want MastCell and myself to do? I've been involved in quite a few similar discussions about other drugs, where every claim of adverse events falls flat on its face when it comes to reliable external sources. ] | ] 11:25, 6 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| Please read this peer reviewed and referenced paper. http://www.mitoresearch.org/Mitomatters%202004-1.pdf | |||
| It establishes triglyceride increase as a marker for a statin reaction. Isn't this of value to the medical community and the general population of patients that seek valid information from Misplaced Pages? Mastcell felt so and he also agreed to rewrite the Statin Article, though he knew that it would be difficult and time consuming. You may wish to help him. The goal of a Misplaced Pages article is adhere to the Pillars of Neutrality and present referenced information in a unbiased manner, is that correct?. Since statins are the largest prescription drug class in the world, then shouldn't Misplaced Pages have a first class article explaining unbiased aspects of this class of medication. My basic POV is to increase the quality of Misplaced Pages, that is all. | |||
| The choice is yours Dr. Wolff, from my side the discussion is ended, unless you wish to continue it. I would appreciate your chatting with Mastcell. | |||
| P.S. - The above chart is typically seen in my research and confirms Phillips findings. For your personal information, Dr. Phillips presently has over 400 local cases in the San Diego area alone. I have corresponded with him. I have not included any of this material in any Misplaced Pages article, since it is OR. ] 14:19, 6 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Your arguments to include NOR just because it is "of value to the medical community and the general population" doesn't hold water. Obviously, if we cannot ] the information in question, it is doubtful whether it change the ] article from being first class to being ''even more'' first class. | |||
| :How certain are you that MitoMatters is peer-reviewed? The article looks very nice, but I can make something look very nice on my word processor. I don't think I need to liaise with MastCell unless new evidence is published. At the moment, SIM-ETL or whatever we shall call it probably is not quite notable enough to include it. Given the wide uses of statins, I would expect a paper in a core medical journal (e.g. high-impact journals such as ''Am J Med'', ''Ann Intern Med'' or such) to achieve the necessary notability. ] | ] 16:24, 6 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Listen, some of Phillips' research has made Ann Intern Med (PMID 12353945), but without mention of the triglyceride thing. This article is certainly notable enough to be cited. | |||
| :Incidentally, {{DOI|10.1016/j.jacc.2007.02.049}} talks about Q10 and the limited evidence for its role in statin myopathy. ] | ] 16:38, 6 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| I believe that this will answer your first question - Is this a peer reviewed journal? http://www.mitoresearch.org/publications.html | |||
| Another point you should consider is that Misplaced Pages rates the Statin Article as a B-Class article. Not very good for the largest selling group of medications in the world. The article is, unfortunately not "first class", I am just trying to make it "first class". ] 19:19, 6 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| :Clearly, ''Mitochondrion'' is peer-reviewed (and indeed ). The page you are quoting is awfully quiet on the peer review status of MitoMatters. I presume you are mixing the two up. | |||
| :Obviously the "B-class" status is awarded by some Misplaced Pages user going around pharmacology pages and seeing if they fit a set group of criteria. I can guarantee you that addition of your theory will not suddenly make its class jump to A-class. | |||
| :How about you leave a message on ] ''shortly'' outlining what you want to say and providing the references for it? I'm sure that if you follow these simple instructions the ensuing discussion will be relatively straightforward and may well achieve the effect ''you'' desire to achieve. In other words: I will ''support'' claims of "normal CK statin myopathy" and am open to persuation with regards to the triglycerides thing ''provided'' adequate sources can be advanced for every claim. ] | ] 19:34, 6 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| : Dr Wolff- I do not wish to contribute to the article or effect its outcome. What I want is for MastCell and yourself to get together and write a Class A article on statins, that is neutral and unbiased. Statins are the most widely prescribed drug family in the world. Such an article will benefit all concerned. Many people now look to Misplaced Pages to provide them with information in the medical field. As pysicians and researchers, is it not our professional obligation to provide the most accurate informaton that we can obtain. As to whether Phillips research is theory and my validates it - I will allow the medical journal that is now reviewing it make that decision. | |||
| ] 20:22, 6 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 20:22, 6 August 2007
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27.
Tojo
Regarding Tojo, I need information about his latest edits. Fred Bauder 21:40, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 23rd, 2007.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 30 | 23 July 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:22, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
guidance
I am getting my posts deleted when I try to add relevant, informative links to the external link sections. I am not a spammer, just think that other people with endocrine diseases might find the hormone foundation useful. (i am only posting on endocrine related sites and the hormone foundation is the educational arm of the endocrine society - with info about those problems) I am also editing content and making notes to go back and add to some pages... however not if it is going to be erased. What can I do? Why am I being deleted when partner sites and sites who direct people to hormone.org pages are being kept?
Payot
There is an article entitled 'Payot', which seems to be the name of a company dealing in beauty products. As far as I can tell, the most common spelling is 'peyos' (even within the article!). Could you move 'Payot' to 'Peyos' ? --Redaktor 05:45, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for July 30th, 2007.
Apologies for the late delivery this week; my plans to handle this while on vacation went awry. Ral315
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 31 | 30 July 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 00:05, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Re Unreferenced
Sounds very good :). When i do a next batch of article ratings, any articles i find unreferenced i shall put on a notepad and then when im done for the day, place them on the med talk page for people to go about and reference them. Should i look through the ones i did the previous few days and add them to the list as well or am i to hope u skimmed through my contribution list and already found a reference for some of those articles :P? Cya Later.petze 11:58, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
Pseudoxanthoma elasticum
Pseudoxanthoma elasticum looks good to me. I did a quick literature search with UpToDate and SUMSearch. Didn't find anything to add as this rare illness does not get much study in clinical medicine. I put in a minor edit for one citation on ABCC6 and atherosclerosis; however, I am a primary care internist and not too good with diseases like PXE. Feel free to revert iuf edit does not seem helpful. Badgettrg 21:17, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
Idea for Clinical Medicine
Please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Clinical_medicine#Let.27s_make_linking_to_PubMed_easier
I have a hard time explaining this idea. Is the idea that is linked above seem intelligible? Thanks Badgettrg 21:17, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
Time for Discussion
You have shown significant interest in certain articles. I think it would be a good idea to discuss this graph with MastCell.
Wiseoldowl 03:56, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
- To be truthful, I have no idea what you are talking about. I think you are trying to draw me into a discussion similar to the one I was conducting with Jtclemens (talk · contribs) in June last year. At that point, this user was trying to convince me that there was such a clinical entity as "statin-induced myopathy with normal CPK levels and elevated triglycerides" (SIM-ETL). The only reliable source he could provide was an article he had written himself in a local paper. That was not very impressive.
- I am not a statin apologist, but I am weary of the fact that so many people make poorly sustainable claims just because a class of drugs is rather effective at something that was previously so difficult to achieve (modify cardiovascular morbidity and mortality). You never hear these noises about metformin (which has much more dangerous side effects if prescribed inappropriately) and budesonide, to name some commonly-used drugs.
- If you want me to comment on this, I suggest you provide a bit more information. What is your POV, and what do you want MastCell and myself to do? I've been involved in quite a few similar discussions about other drugs, where every claim of adverse events falls flat on its face when it comes to reliable external sources. JFW | T@lk 11:25, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Please read this peer reviewed and referenced paper. http://www.mitoresearch.org/Mitomatters%202004-1.pdf It establishes triglyceride increase as a marker for a statin reaction. Isn't this of value to the medical community and the general population of patients that seek valid information from Misplaced Pages? Mastcell felt so and he also agreed to rewrite the Statin Article, though he knew that it would be difficult and time consuming. You may wish to help him. The goal of a Misplaced Pages article is adhere to the Pillars of Neutrality and present referenced information in a unbiased manner, is that correct?. Since statins are the largest prescription drug class in the world, then shouldn't Misplaced Pages have a first class article explaining unbiased aspects of this class of medication. My basic POV is to increase the quality of Misplaced Pages, that is all. The choice is yours Dr. Wolff, from my side the discussion is ended, unless you wish to continue it. I would appreciate your chatting with Mastcell. P.S. - The above chart is typically seen in my research and confirms Phillips findings. For your personal information, Dr. Phillips presently has over 400 local cases in the San Diego area alone. I have corresponded with him. I have not included any of this material in any Misplaced Pages article, since it is OR. Wiseoldowl 14:19, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
- Your arguments to include NOR just because it is "of value to the medical community and the general population" doesn't hold water. Obviously, if we cannot verify the information in question, it is doubtful whether it change the statin article from being first class to being even more first class.
- How certain are you that MitoMatters is peer-reviewed? The article looks very nice, but I can make something look very nice on my word processor. I don't think I need to liaise with MastCell unless new evidence is published. At the moment, SIM-ETL or whatever we shall call it probably is not quite notable enough to include it. Given the wide uses of statins, I would expect a paper in a core medical journal (e.g. high-impact journals such as Am J Med, Ann Intern Med or such) to achieve the necessary notability. JFW | T@lk 16:24, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
- Listen, some of Phillips' research has made Ann Intern Med (PMID 12353945), but without mention of the triglyceride thing. This article is certainly notable enough to be cited.
- Incidentally, doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2007.02.049 talks about Q10 and the limited evidence for its role in statin myopathy. JFW | T@lk 16:38, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
I believe that this will answer your first question - Is this a peer reviewed journal? http://www.mitoresearch.org/publications.html
Another point you should consider is that Misplaced Pages rates the Statin Article as a B-Class article. Not very good for the largest selling group of medications in the world. The article is, unfortunately not "first class", I am just trying to make it "first class". Wiseoldowl 19:19, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
- Clearly, Mitochondrion is peer-reviewed (and indeed indexed by Medline). The page you are quoting is awfully quiet on the peer review status of MitoMatters. I presume you are mixing the two up.
- Obviously the "B-class" status is awarded by some Misplaced Pages user going around pharmacology pages and seeing if they fit a set group of criteria. I can guarantee you that addition of your theory will not suddenly make its class jump to A-class.
- How about you leave a message on Talk:Statin shortly outlining what you want to say and providing the references for it? I'm sure that if you follow these simple instructions the ensuing discussion will be relatively straightforward and may well achieve the effect you desire to achieve. In other words: I will support claims of "normal CK statin myopathy" and am open to persuation with regards to the triglycerides thing provided adequate sources can be advanced for every claim. JFW | T@lk 19:34, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
- Dr Wolff- I do not wish to contribute to the article or effect its outcome. What I want is for MastCell and yourself to get together and write a Class A article on statins, that is neutral and unbiased. Statins are the most widely prescribed drug family in the world. Such an article will benefit all concerned. Many people now look to Misplaced Pages to provide them with information in the medical field. As pysicians and researchers, is it not our professional obligation to provide the most accurate informaton that we can obtain. As to whether Phillips research is theory and my validates it - I will allow the medical journal that is now reviewing it make that decision.