Talk:Mark Purdey

Nerve gas[edit]

As I remember, the nerve gases were developed from the pesticides, not the other way around. It's explained on the organophosphate page. Tim Vickers 23:57, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the current summary of the mechanism he proposed is wrong. It was not proposed that the change in calcium signaling produced prion proteins, it was thought that the production of prion proteins changed calcium levels and Inositol triphosphate signaling. Tim Vickers 00:06, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article fixed[edit]

Mark Purdey was an idiot; he did no "research." His "papers" in the crackpot Medical Hypotheses "journal" contain no actual data, other than some specious epidemiological analysis. The remainder of the corpus seems to consist of a lot of scientific-sounding words strung together in various orders. His explanations for BSE are backed up by few, if any citations, and are clearly the work of someone with no understanding of biochemistry. This article would have given the layman the impression that Purdey was a well-respected scholar, but in fact he was a charlatan - a successful charlatan, but a charlatan nonetheless. Angio (talk) 08:29, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Would that be an example of your NPV Angio? Your revisions are childish and laughable !

http://www.nature.com/emboj/journal/v19/n6/abs/7592231a.html http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10051591 http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090417084124.htm http://www.physorg.com/news165161592.html

These are just the 1st four entries when google is searched for prion protein + copper - are all these people idiotic crackpot charlatans as well ? Seems the idiot you refer to was actually 15 years ahead of your well respected scholars ! User:DLM4473 —Preceding undated comment added 01:47, 18 September 2010 (UTC).[reply]

I am going to revert your edits, because these articles have absolutely nothing to do with Purdey's crackpot theories, other than that they contain the words "copper" and "PrP" in the same sentence. It would be like arguing that the Cold War never ended, because you can still find papers by searching for "USSR" and "United States". Purdey's papers are complete speculation and were published in a disreputable journal that accepts unsubstantiated hypotheses as research.Angio (talk) 19:56, 16 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Mark Purdey. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:10, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]