Talk:Atkins diet: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 08:24, 8 May 2022

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Atkins diet article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3: 90 days

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Alternative Views C‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative ViewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative ViewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative ViewsAlternative Views articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Food and drink C‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles 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.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Food and Drink task list:

To edit this page, select here

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:

Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt
Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar
Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish
Participate in project-related deletion discussions.
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food
Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section

Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Epilepsy C‑class Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Epilepsy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of epilepsy and epileptic seizures 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.EpilepsyWikipedia:WikiProject EpilepsyTemplate:WikiProject EpilepsyEpilepsy articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Brands C‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands 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.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Medicine: Society / Neurology C‑class Low‑importance

	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
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Society and Medicine task force (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Neurology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Removal of per-reviewed randomized Controlled Trial and addition of original research to the article

User:Alexbrn, Please explain why you removed a results of per-reviewed randomized study published by prestigious medical primary source (that is covered by many secondary sources as well) and added a claim that is not based on any source given. I intend to take this to relevant noticeboards, as a per-reviewed randomized study is not a "fringie" source, but a relevant and reliable source, as per Wikipedia policy guidelines.Tritomex (talk) 20:36, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alex' edsum read "unreliable/fringe" to which I'd add primary and non WP:MEDRS in a biomedical context. Note that I'm not answering for Alex. You would get the same answer if you went to dramah boards. - Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 21:20, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User: Roxy the dog This is all totally incorrect. The study titled "Comparison of the Atkins, Zone, Ornish, and LEARN diets for change in weight and related risk factors among overweight premenopausal women: the A TO Z Weight Loss Study: a randomized trial" was published in JAMA a most prestigious a peer-reviewed medical journal of American medical association. Although primary sources are usable according to Wikipedia policy, it could be also cited by reliable secondary sources like the Nature magazine or Cambridge University Press [1]. It is also in Cohrain library. What is astonishing is that my properly sourced and properly attributed text was replaced with an original research, a medical claim that does not exist in source given. This claim is "sourced" by another primary source. So no, I am sure that relaible noticeboards will know to differentiate between peer-reviewed medical journal and quackery, pseudomedical claims that are not based on any sources or are taken out of context from primary sources.Tritomex (talk) 23:38, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:MEDRS. Primary sources are generally not reliable for biomedical claims; old ones are even worse. Alexbrn (talk) 05:18, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your ping didn't work. - Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 06:27, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please, without WP:IDONTHEARYOU, If you question the reliability of primary sources, why you User:Alexbrn, made this controversial biomedical claim [2], based on this primary source [3]? Worse you took a sentence from the introduction of the study, unrelated to the aim or results of that study. Here are WP:RS secondary sources that I intend to put alongside the primary source. From The Stanford News: [4] "Researchers at the School of Medicine have completed the largest and longest-ever comparison of four popular diets, and the lowest-carbohydrate Atkins diet came out on top...." Than, many more WP:RS secondary sources to back it up [5] from Science Daily, also this meta-analysis [6]. There are plenty of additional secondary sources as well.

@@ Line 26: / Line 26: @@
 :::See [[WP:MEDRS]]. Primary sources are generally not reliable for biomedical claims; old ones are even worse. [[User:Alexbrn|Alexbrn]] ([[User talk:Alexbrn|talk]]) 05:18, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
 :::Your ping didn't work. - [[User:Roxy the dog|'''Roxy''' <small> the grumpy dog</small>.]] [[User talk:Roxy the dog|'''wooF''']] 06:27, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
+:::Please, without [[WP:IDONTHEARYOU]], If  you question the reliability of primary sources, why you [[User:Alexbrn]], made this controversial biomedical claim [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Atkins_diet&type=revision&diff=1086642961&oldid=1086640812], based on this primary source [https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/obr.13195]? Worse you took a sentence from the introduction of the  study, unrelated to the aim or results of that study. Here are WP:RS secondary sources that I intend to put alongside the primary source. From [[The Stanford News]]: [https://news.stanford.edu/news/2007/march7/med-diet-030707.html]  "Researchers at the School of Medicine have completed the largest and longest-ever comparison of four popular diets, and the lowest-carbohydrate Atkins diet came out on top...." Than, many more WP:RS secondary sources to back it up [https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/03/070307075749.htm] from [[Science Daily]], also this meta-analysis  [https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets#TOC_TITLE_HDR_9]. There are plenty of additional secondary sources as well.