Talk:Mesoamerican nephropathy

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Nephrology task force (assessed as High-importance).

Mesoamerica (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mesoamerica, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.MesoamericaWikipedia:WikiProject MesoamericaTemplate:WikiProject MesoamericaMesoamerica articles

Central America

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Central America, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Central America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Central AmericaWikipedia:WikiProject Central AmericaTemplate:WikiProject Central AmericaCentral America articles

Selected Citation Herbicide - Logical Problem[edit]

Error in logical conclusion and refering to political opposition and questions about its scientific evidence for the Herbicide Glyphosate as cause for deadly epidemic of kidney disease,^[1]. The citation as evidence in the context of Chronic Kidney Disease for Sri Lanka’s government caused an "on hold" for the decision to ban the top-selling Monsanto herbicide glyphosate. Scientific evidence for Glyphosat was published in context of cancer in March 2015 by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), an intergovernmental agency forming part of the World Health Organization of the United Nations, published a summary of their forthcoming monograph on glyphosate, and classified glyphosate as "probably carcinogenic in humans" (category 2A) based on epidemiological studies, animal studies, and in vitro studies. It noted that there was "limited evidence" of carcinogenicity in humans for non-Hodgkin lymphoma.Cite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page).^[2]^[3] The IARC classifies substances for their carcinogenic potential, and "a few positive findings can be enough to declare a hazard, even if there are negative studies, as well." Unlike the BfR, it does not conduct a risk assessment, weighing benefits against risk.^[4].

Logical Error:

  Glyphosate does not cause Chronic Kidney disease, so there is not a problem with the application of Glyphosate.

The decision to ban Glyphosate or to allow the application in Sri Lanka is in the governmental domain of regulation of agrochemicals and comparing risks and benefits. The logical error is located before in the actual decision making to ban in the scientific logical reasoning from Glyphosate to the risk factors for diseases (including Cancer).

--Bert Niehaus (talk) 08:29, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Sasha Chavkin (11 April 2014). "Herbicide ban on hold in Sri Lanka, as source of deadly kidney disease remains elusive". The Center for Public Integrity. Retrieved 3 September 2014.
^ International Agency for Research on Cancer, IARC Monographs, Volume 112. Glyphosate, in: Some Organophosphate Insecticides and Herbicides,IARC/WHO, Lyon, pp.321-412, 2017, https://monographs.iarc.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/mono112.pdf}}
^ Specter M (10 April 2015). "Roundup and Risk Assessment". New Yorker. 'Probable' means that there was enough evidence to say it is more than possible, but not enough evidence to say it is a carcinogen," Aaron Blair, a lead researcher on the IARC's study, said. Blair, a scientist emeritus at the National Cancer Institute, has studied the effects of pesticides for years. "It means you ought to be a little concerned about" glyphosate, he said.
^ Pollack A (27 March 2015). "Weed Killer, Long Cleared, Is Doubted". New York Times.

Citation Needed[edit]

In the article the statement "...or agents have also been brought to the chart of possibilities as a culprit for this unusual form of kidney damage." in the "summary of current scientific evidence" needs a as marked "citation needed". Removed that sentence mentioning "other possibilities" and recommend to add evidence from peer-reviewed journals and mention scientific contributions to the article rather than make a statement about "other possibilities". "citation needed" for this part of the sentence is from June 2014, so the uncited "other possibilities" part of the sentence will be removed. --Bert Niehaus (talk) 07:09, 27 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Multifactorial Disease and Precautionary Principle[edit]

The disease CKDu or CKDnt (non-traditional causes) are regarded as multifactorial prevalent. The high number of cases of CKDu mesoamerica is mentioned. Reading the article seems to have an underlying conclusion "no evidence - no action needed beyond scientific clarification of causes".

Citation Wikipedia Article: "To date, CKDu (MeN) causes remain undetermined and debatable; nothing can be ruled out".

At least mentioning the "precautionary principle" may be helpful for a neutral point of view especially for medical decision making. Medical decision making is performed very often under "uncertainty" especially when causes cannot be clarified fully under time constraints or due to access to lab facilities in an emergency case. With a multifactorial set of risk factors currently a main factor cannot be addressed. The precautionary principle addresses multiple risk factors and tries to implement risk mitigation strategies even if the causes remain unclear (i.e. workflow optimization, minimize exposure to agrochemical, reduce self-medication, mitigate dehydration during exhausting work, ...). --Bert Niehaus (talk) 09:14, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Logical Problem in Arguments[edit]

Multifactorial problem. Assume that a disease is definitely caused by A,B,C. The disease will develop if at least 2 risk factors are present in a certain region.

A,B prevalence of disease in region 1
B,C prevalence of disease in region 2
C,A prevalence of disease in region 3

All regions 1,2,3 do not have a single risk factor A,B or C in common (intersection). So logically we cannot conclude, because A is as risk factor not present in region 2, A is not a relevant risk factor. But arguments in article seem to follow that line. Corrected this logical error in section about multifactorial problem.

The same logical error seems to be present in section "Cultural pattern" or the underlying line of arguments should be clarified!

--Bert Niehaus (talk) 12:59, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The problem with a "global approach (CKDu/CKDnt)" without certainty[edit]

1.- This Wikipedia page is devoted to Mesoamerican nephropathy (MeN) only. 2.- To date, MeN has not been demonstrated to be the same disease as CINAC in Sri Lanka or other endemic nephropathies around the globe. Although the idea of a global nephropathy is attractive, we are far from concluiding they are all the same entity. 3.- Mixing/extrapolating studies, reports, findings from CINAC to MeN should be done with caution. 4.- Sri Lank endemic Nephropathy (CINAC) should be further discussed in a different wikipedia page, unless new evidence arises showing both to be the same entity.

--gtrab (gtrab) 12:59, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(+) Support for comment gtrab of not mixing Sri Lanka and other endemic nephropathies with MeN.

A root page nephropathy can branch to the child pages

Mesoamerican Nephropathy,
Sri Lank endemic Nephropathy (CINAC),
...

The disease can be different from the medical perspective, but the progression of the disease could share the same common risk factors. To what extend the precautionary principle will be applied in a standard medical workflow and a huge number of cases, should be added. The root page can define the "generic approach to the unknown" listing risk factors e.g. dehydration, self-medication, work flow management, exposure to chemicals, Wikiversity:Risk Literacy,... that are known to be nephrotoxic or have an negative impact on the kidney function.

The logical error in scientific arguments of multifactorial problems is an problem not only present in the current article so a I would create learning resource on Wikiversity on that topic and refer to permanent link of this article to learn about logical errors in scientific arguments.

Thank you for comment gtrab

--Bert Niehaus (talk) 09:51, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mesoamerican nephropathy. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130919161730/http://www.salud.gob.sv/archivos/comunicaciones/archivos_comunicados2013/pdf/Declaracion_San%20Salvador_ERCnT_26042013.pdf to http://www.salud.gob.sv/archivos/comunicaciones/archivos_comunicados2013/pdf/Declaracion_San%20Salvador_ERCnT_26042013.pdf

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) 12:08, 26 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References[edit]

[Chavkin-1] Sasha Chavkin (11 April 2014). "Herbicide ban on hold in Sri Lanka, as source of deadly kidney disease remains elusive". The Center for Public Integrity. Retrieved 3 September 2014.

[IARC_Mono_112-2] International Agency for Research on Cancer, IARC Monographs, Volume 112. Glyphosate, in: Some Organophosphate Insecticides and Herbicides,IARC/WHO, Lyon, pp.321-412, 2017, https://monographs.iarc.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/mono112.pdf}}

[3] Specter M (10 April 2015). "Roundup and Risk Assessment". New Yorker. 'Probable' means that there was enough evidence to say it is more than possible, but not enough evidence to say it is a carcinogen," Aaron Blair, a lead researcher on the IARC's study, said. Blair, a scientist emeritus at the National Cancer Institute, has studied the effects of pesticides for years. "It means you ought to be a little concerned about" glyphosate, he said.

[4] Pollack A (27 March 2015). "Weed Killer, Long Cleared, Is Doubted". New York Times.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]