| Revision as of 18:25, 21 December 2024 editBon courage (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users66,153 edits →Contributions from people without no expertise in this field is included under this topic: ReplyTag: Reply← Previous edit | Revision as of 12:08, 23 December 2024 edit undoWeirdNAnnoyed (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users3,457 edits →Off-topic content: new sectionTag: New topicNext edit → | ||
| Line 27: | Line 27: | ||
| Both are referred to in the article, in a way that seems to me to imply that this is the case, but I am very unsure about this, so I request that someone more knowledgeable about the subject(s)—and/or with the time to read through the sources cited in the articles—review this and the other two articles. ] (]) 00:56, 21 December 2024 (UTC) | Both are referred to in the article, in a way that seems to me to imply that this is the case, but I am very unsure about this, so I request that someone more knowledgeable about the subject(s)—and/or with the time to read through the sources cited in the articles—review this and the other two articles. ] (]) 00:56, 21 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
| == Off-topic content == | |||
| I just removed the "Warburg Effect in non-cancer cells" section, as it was completely off-topic and not supported by RS (one of the sources was a commentary/editorial and thus not reliable; the other never mentioned the Warburg effect at all). Relating the well-known metabolic burst of immune cells to the metabolism of cancer cells is ] in the absence of sources. I see an awful lot of tangentially-related material in this article that needs to be toned down as well. I'm also working on ] and the more I read the more I think these two articles will have to be merged at some point. Feedback welcome. ] (]) 12:08, 23 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 12:08, 23 December 2024
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Warburg effect (oncology) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
 Archives (Index) |
|
This page is archived by ClueBot III. |
Much research indicates fasting does Reduce cancer
Updates have been added concerning research opposing the Lancet article. Fairnsquare (talk) 16:56, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
Claims of "misconceptions" must be carefully monitored. Often those who claim that others are misinformed are themselves misinformed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fairnsquare (talk • contribs) 17:30, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- Junk sources and misrepresented sources do not make the case, however. You material is thus reverted. Bon courage (talk) 17:41, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
- Which are the junk or misrepresented sources that you claim? Fairnsquare (talk) 23:49, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
- Oncotarget for example is a predatory journal, and none of the sources support "Claims of misconception may themselves be a misconception" which seems to be your own WP:OR, Your other sources say things like
Bon courage (talk) 01:51, 24 November 2024 (UTC)Human studies examining the effects of intermittent fasting on insulin‐stimulated growth and other relevant hormonal and inflammatory indicators of carcinogenesis, in contrast, appear to be clinically unimportant thus far.
- Oncotarget for example is a predatory journal, and none of the sources support "Claims of misconception may themselves be a misconception" which seems to be your own WP:OR, Your other sources say things like
- Which are the junk or misrepresented sources that you claim? Fairnsquare (talk) 23:49, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
Contributions from people without no expertise in this field is included under this topic
Grimmes have published "0" papers on Warburg effect, and has no experience or whatsoever in metabolism. It's a shame to cite such clueless "opinions" as reference, which is misleading and insult to people who have worked very hard on this topic. Ravidmurthy (talk) 15:31, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Lancet Oncology is a golden source, especially for this mundane information about quackery. If you keep edit warring and socking you will likely be blocked and/or the article locked. Bon courage (talk) 18:25, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
This article might be mixing up "aerobic glycolysis" and "anaerobic glycolysis"
Both are referred to in the article, in a way that seems to me to imply that this is the case, but I am very unsure about this, so I request that someone more knowledgeable about the subject(s)—and/or with the time to read through the sources cited in the articles—review this and the other two articles. ZFT (talk) 00:56, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
Off-topic content
I just removed the "Warburg Effect in non-cancer cells" section, as it was completely off-topic and not supported by RS (one of the sources was a commentary/editorial and thus not reliable; the other never mentioned the Warburg effect at all). Relating the well-known metabolic burst of immune cells to the metabolism of cancer cells is WP:OR in the absence of sources. I see an awful lot of tangentially-related material in this article that needs to be toned down as well. I'm also working on Metabolic theory of cancer and the more I read the more I think these two articles will have to be merged at some point. Feedback welcome. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 12:08, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Categories: