Talk:Sylvain Lesné

She?

"As of July 22, 2022, Lesné had not commented, and Ashe had declined to comment on the investigation conducted by the University of Minnesota, but **she** stated via email that:...."

SHE? This is a man surely? Rustygecko (talk) 05:37, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

"She" is correct. Dr. Ashe is a woman. 69.141.228.31 (talk) 13:22, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

I added a semi colon to better distinguish between him and her, here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:35, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Amyloid beta star 56

@Lukelahood and Graham Beards: might one of you be able to create a stub, or write a sub-section somewhere, about Aβ*56 ? Also, review the terminology I've used in this article? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:49, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

PS so far I have only started Amyloid beta star 56, which I'm not even sure is how we would name the article or article section, and where we would place that content. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:04, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Does this not belong in Amyloid? Graham Beards (talk) 18:17, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Graham, I just found this ... scroll far enough down to read Ashe's response in the comments ... I think you should be able to sort if from there ? Alzforum response from Ashe. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:25, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

PS it is interesting that she refers to him as a former colleague, but I am not going to use an alzforum post to add such content to the article. Also, a number of the associated researchers have responded on that alzforum thread. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:35, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Graham Beards I can't decipher how we decide what goes at amyloid from what goes at amyloid beta. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:49, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

Alerted WT:MED here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:13, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Also Abeta56. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:39, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi. If it is so important, why wasn’t Ab*56 mentioned in Biochemistry of Alzheimer's disease ? (I am not a specialist) —Lewisiscrazy (talk) 15:41, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

That is precisely the basis of my curiosity on the delay in reporting from the reputable US outlets, and my urge for caution in getting too far ahead on this breaking story. Is the Science article overhyping the significance of this one finding, because of the related facts: a) why didn't Ashe see this, b) why the NIH continued to fund Lesné after the whistleblower report, c) the other issues occurring in Alzheimer's drug research, and d) how much of the current drug research is really about *56 ? I'd like to know a lot more about how crucial this one protein is to the big picture, aside from what may turn out to be the obvious and typical waste of US taxpayer money coming from the NIH. For example, The Daily Kos was so hyperbolic that I hope we won't see edits extending into that territory until we have better sources and more coverage (independent from what Piller is reporting). And it looks to me like, so far, the UK outlets are basically mimicking Piller. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:48, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

And to that aspect, this is an important nuance :). Thanks for that, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:49, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

WP:fr

Lewisiscrazy I see you have added an interlanguage link See also to the French Wikipedia at amyloid hypothesis (awesome!); once we get sorted where to park additional info about star 56 in an en.wiki article, are you able to write the French articles? I notice it is well covered in the French blogs ... and wonder who speaks French and can monitor coverage at the French Wikipedia (I'm good for Spanish only). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:02, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

I am French, I contributed to fr:Hypothèse amyloïde but I saw no coverage on the major French media so far. And nothing on wp:fr except a couple of discussions. —Lewisiscrazy (talk) 17:22, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Yep, it seems to be mostly in blogs and the like ... happy to know someone is on it :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:23, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Lewisiscrazy are you able to tell me where the 1974 birth date is coming from in the French article (now created as a translation from here)? It seems to be uncited there, but my French is minimal (I can read it to the extent it is a romance language and I am fluent in Spanish). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:30, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

I can’t tell, but maybe User: Archibald Tuttle can. —Lewisiscrazy (talk) 17:55, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Thx; I've been roughly following the talk discussion at the Fr Wiki [1] and so far we seem to be on the same page. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:42, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Lewisiscrazy isn't this a Wiki (not a reliable source)? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:02, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Here https://www.idref.fr/069067929 —Lewisiscrazy (talk) 19:08, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Got it, thx, will add next. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:36, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Doctoral thesis

I am unconvinced his doctoral thesis belongs where it is, in the main body of the article, until/unless a secondary source discusses it. Does anyone have P or G guidance in that respect? User:PamD? I could be underinformed. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:30, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

@SandyGeorgia: I think it's relevant for academics as it shows what they spent 3 years of their life working on, so I tend to add it to the "education" section if I can find it. PamD 15:26, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Whereas I hesitate to add anything like that not covered by secondary sources, as UNDUE. I have never come across a policy- or guideline-based discussion on this, so more feedback could help. The only primary source I have added to the article is a mention of/link to the explicit Nature study, as it is so clearly the subject of secondary review. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:31, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

I moved it to External links; we already know he spent years of his life working on it, by the fact that he has a PhD; I'm uncomfortable with primary sources in articles that aren't discussed in secondary sources. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:18, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

I think it is relevant and appropriate in the "education" section: it's just one stage on from saying what subject someone did in their BSc and MSc, the thesis topic is the subject of their PhD studies. But I don't have the energy tonight to argue (I feel a mild case of "Ownership" here) though would be delighted if anyone else stepped in with an opinion (especially if they agreed with me, of course). PamD 19:44, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Protein redundancy

Lewisiscrazy, thank you for picking up one of my (many, habitual [2]) typos here. Regarding "redundancy" here, we shouldn't force readers to click out to get context for jargon used, and describing it as an amyloid protein was intended to help in that regard. Can you suggest an alternate approach to provide some brief context, or a way/place to work back in amyloid protein? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:37, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi. Ab*56 is fully defined (as an amyloid protein oligomer) in the previous sentence, so in my opinion we don’t need to help the reader further here. That’s what I meant but I am fully open to suggestions, feel free to proceed. —Lewisiscrazy (talk) 15:19, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

We have it fully defined down here, but not in the lead. Could we work that back in to the lead? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:25, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

I have tried to. —Lewisiscrazy (talk) 15:40, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, looks good to me (not a neuroscientist). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:42, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Slow and steady wins the race

Overall, I urge that we wait for more sources to cover the topic before going too much further in depth than I already have, so we don't get too far out ahead on this until we have an abundance of scientific sources. I think it curious that we have so far heard from major UK news outlets, but none in the US (eg New York Times, Washington Post), and I've already seen a few instances of minor contradictions in what is reported so far, along with a hugely sensationalized report in The Daily Kos, which draws what preliminarily appear to be hyperbolic conclusions. Let's try not to repeat what could turn out to be laypress inaccuracies and make sure what we write will stand the test of time. The basics are in. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:43, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

It was covered quite thoroughly on the main UK national radio news, BBC Radio R's "Today", yesterday morning, 23rd (oh, or possibly 22nd - unreliable memory!). There was an Alzheimer's expert commenting, but I can't remember who it was - possibly the same Sara Imarisio from Alz Soc. PamD 15:29, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

It was also well covered in the. Science Podcast (see External links), but I'm still intrigued about the delayed hard-print coverage in the US, eg NYT, WaPo, Los Angeles Times, and the like. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:33, 24 July 2022 (UTC)