User talk:Gak: Difference between revisions
Line 284: | Line 284: | ||
::::No worries. This is still a primary research study [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=21880848] and commenting on a retrospective analysis is [[WP:UNDUE]] IMO.[[User:Jmh649|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Jmh649|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Jmh649|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Jmh649|email]]) 12:08, 15 April 2012 (UTC) |
::::No worries. This is still a primary research study [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=21880848] and commenting on a retrospective analysis is [[WP:UNDUE]] IMO.[[User:Jmh649|<span style="color:#0000f1">'''Doc James'''</span>]] ([[User talk:Jmh649|talk]] · [[Special:Contributions/Jmh649|contribs]] · [[Special:EmailUser/Jmh649|email]]) 12:08, 15 April 2012 (UTC) |
||
:::::Why, when people are going out and buying VitD on the basis of this report?--[[User:Gak|Gak]] ([[User talk:Gak#top|talk]]) 13:20, 15 April 2012 (UTC) |
:::::Why, when people are going out and buying VitD on the basis of this report?--[[User:Gak|Gak]] ([[User talk:Gak#top|talk]]) 13:20, 15 April 2012 (UTC) |
||
== Your entry in [Management of Depression] regarding Chalder et al (2012) on exercise == |
|||
Recently, you edited the above mentioned article and added this: |
|||
''A randomised-controlled trial 361 patients published in 2012 found no benefit from exercise'' |
|||
You cite: |
|||
''Chalder et al. “Facilitated physical activity as a treatment for depressed adults: randomised controlled trial” British Medical Journal, 2012.'' |
|||
Now I wonder if you've actually read the study. Because, if at all, this study shows that simply encouraging someone to exercise has no effect. Which is equal to encouraging people not to be depressed. The study has been poorly designed, and you might agree on that if you take the time to dive into the matter. A hint: the exercise group were mainly encouraged by phone and had to self-report whatever they did as exercise. "Walking to a car" or "taking the stairs" was included in the definition for exercise. Depressed people have been repeatedly shown to have poor compliance. Would you want to rely on such data to make a claim about physical exercise as a non-treatment for depression? It has been shown to reduce depression in chronically ill people http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2227111 |
|||
--[[Special:Contributions/84.130.180.155|84.130.180.155]] ([[User talk:84.130.180.155|talk]]) 13:28, 11 June 2012 (UTC) |
Revision as of 13:28, 11 June 2012
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.
Here are some tips to help you get started:
- To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
- Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
- If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
- Follow the Wikipedia:Simplified Ruleset
- Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
- Remember Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
- Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!
Good luck!
Tuberculosis - pages on DOTS/RNTCP
I had recently started a Wikipage on RNTCP, and only later did i realise that you have previously contributed a lot towards Tuberculosis , and that you had discussed about the need for including/integrating DOTS on the wikipage Tuberculosis treatment. Now it looks odd to have a separate page for RNTCP without one for DOTS. What shall i do ? Seethahere 10:46, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
Careful
It's "sTIBogluconate", not sTILBogluconate.
No harm done, this is just so you know. DS 15:37, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
Protocol
Also, it's not generally considered polite to remove messages from your talk page unless they're grossly insulting. You can archive if/when it gets too big, yes, but just deleting... not really done. DS 03:35, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
Protocol
Okay, firstly, you should leave messages on other users' talk pages, not on the userpages themselves. This is because, when you leave the message on the talk page, this triggers the "you have new messages" announcement.
As for why you shouldn't remove messages - there are various reasons for that. It can be construed as looking like you're trying to hide something... it's not good to delete warnings... there was an ArbCom ruling that it's not good to tamper with other people's opinions and statements... anyway, it's not like we're strapped for memory here. If the page gets too full, you can archive it. DS 22:11, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
- I don't think it is too unreasonable to archive messages you have read by deleting them - they are still available in the page history. Is there a policy guideline that they should be archived, and not deleted? Thue | talk 09:31, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Body louse
Good work on Body louse! :)
Couldn't you also just put the clothes with cannot be boiled in sealed plastic bags, and then wait until all the lice have hatched and starved to death? Thue | talk 09:28, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
- Not practical because the eggs don't hatch until they come into contact with warmth. I have no idea how long eggs can survive in that sort of "suspended animation" sort of state.--Gak 20:08, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Hey doc!
Hello, for some reason I hadn't noticed your extensive contributions to infectious disease subjects. Good thing too, because it was one of the fields Wikipedia needed help in. Where do you work? Have you considered joining our doctors' mess at Wikipedia:WikiProject Clinical medicine? JFW | T@lk 16:47, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi, Gak. JFW mentioned that you may be able to help rescue the featured status of tuberculosis. Some of the problems are listed here. It needs to be brought to standard, more along the lines of cystic fibrosis or AIDS, which are recent medical featured articles. If you're able to help, please drop a note on the Featured Article Review page. Thanks! Sandy 21:02, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
Page now nominated as a FAC. Comments and suggestions are welcome on the review page. Thank you. TimVickers 00:53, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance
Thanks for recent formating and additions to Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance. I added some addition PubMed abstract and article links to the citations you had kindly provided.
The article in the 'Annual review' section indicates that referral to haematologist only occurs when serum electrophoresis shows an increasing paraprotein level, and only then does the haematologist arrange a skeletal survery. Your addition of a diagnosis criteria section implies that referral to a haematologist and the skeletal survery are performed prior to making the diagnosis, rather than at a later date. This seems to me, as a nonspecialist, contradictory - either skeletal surveying is generally infrequently initially performed (vs the list of all possible tests that a textbook might list, but which a specialist may commonly choose not to perform), or the info in the 'Annual review' section needs to be relocated within the article. I would be grateful if you could help clarify this point; please see Talk:Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance#Diagnosis, Haematology referral and skeletal surveying :-) David Ruben Talk 02:21, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Antimalarials/antiprotozoals
Just a quick thank you for your recent additions to primaquine, as well as your creations of artesunate, pamaquine and nifurtimox. Keep up the good work. Best, Fvasconcellos 15:27, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Fractional values?
At talk:degrees of freedom (statistics), you wrote:
- Who's written that fractional degrees of freedom are possible?? Why add confusion to an already confused article? --Gak 20:59, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
I don't know who added that, but since your comment I've added a bit on what non-integer degrees of freedom are used for in statistics. Michael Hardy 18:25, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Phase 1
I saw your addition on VX 950. I wasn't aware this was only in Phase 1. Is it generally your view we should have articles on compounds that are still undergoing testing? We certainly don't have a policy yet, and we have many similar articles. I must admit I have written about dabigatran and rivaroxaban, despite them being experimental compounds, but the ximelagatran experience has shown that even post-phase III agents can still bork quite badly. JFW | T@lk 12:33, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
- No idea! VX 950 is now into phase 2 testing but who knows? I am not aware or policy either, but drugs are so often resurrected in different guises. Like Adefovir for HIV was later resurrected for HBV. And I guess I also have patients in clinical trials so it is nice to know what the long term consequences are, e.g., I have a few patients who were in clinical trials for loviride as monotherapy and ended up with K103N mutations and the consequences of that. --Gak 14:00, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
Immunoperoxidase staining
Hi there, I noticed that you left some sort of template asking for more context to be put on the immunoperoxidase staining page. It would be helpful if you put some more specific comments on the talk page. Dr Aaron 14:43, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
- Done.--Gak 00:37, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Khao Phra Viharn
Hello, Gak. I've been fleshing out the Preah Vihear/Phra Viharn article. Wondering if your trip there was recent and whether you entered from the Thai side. My wife and I are thinking of visiting later this year and want to know whether the Cambodians require a visa. I've heard that they don't, but you never know... Writer128 (talk) 20:09, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Khao Phra Viharn 2
Thanks for your response and kind words of advice. Actually, I can manage in Thai myself, having lived in Thailand for six years in the 60s and 70s. Visited Preah Vihear in 1973 or 74 and somewhere have photos from that visit. Are you a Thai speaker as well? I notice you added the Thai name to the article.Writer128 (talk) 03:44, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Okay, thanks for the advice. I'm looking forward to the trip. Writer128 (talk) 01:13, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Surrogate endpoint
Hi, I merged Surrogate markers into surrogate endpoint, as you suggested back in the day. Please review the post-merge cleanup I did to the article, since you are an authority on this topic. EAE (Holla!) 03:46, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Survey request
Hi,
I need your help. I am working on a research project at Boston College, studying creation of medical information on Wikipedia. You are being contacted, because you have been identified as an important contributor to one or more articles.
Would you will be willing to answer a few questions about your experience? We've done considerable background research, but we would also like to gather the insight of the actual editors. Details about the project can be found at the user page of the project leader, geraldckane. Survey questions can be found at geraldckane/medsurvey. Your privacy and confidentiality will be strictly protected!
The questions should only take a few minutes. I hope you will be willing to complete the survey, as we do value your insight. Please do not hesitate to contact me or Professor Kane if you have any questions.
Thank You, Sam4bc (talk) 15:05, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Mosquitoes
Thanks for your work on these. As the main contributor to the Plasmodium page and links there from - mosquitoes show up from time to time. While I know a bit about these I have been reluctant to do much with them as it is an area of considerable complexity. Im impressed any one is prepared to do this. DrMicro
Differential diagnosis
In the article Rabies, is the addition of "differential diagnosis" necessary to the title? I am new to this field, and would like your opinion on that. One the key campaigns in Rabies was in simplifying the titles so that readers new to the field would not be overwhelmed (we had all short of unusual names, such as "The spatial and temporal distribution of opossum rabies", you can see the older version here [1]). ChyranandChloe (talk) 03:07, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
OK
Thanks, I'll see what I can do, but why does it say that it needs references if I can see plenty of references? Buɡboy52.4 (talk) 14:56, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- I looked through the page and it seems that is a genus of mites, which meens that it is suppose to have a group of mites. But I do think that it should be revised to "encyclopedia standard!" And I also found(though I am not sure that plaidgerism is in WP:Policy) plaigerism to the web page, http://zipcodezoo.com/Key/Animalia/Trombiculidae_Family.asp, or it may be possible that the web page used wikipedia... Buɡboy52.4 (talk) 00:31, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- Hello agian. I just wanted your opinion before I continued editing, so I added info, rearranged the titles, and added a taxonomy in my sandbox, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bugboy52.40/sandbox2. Tell me what you think. Buɡboy52.4 (talk) 03:03, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- Well, if you can get me some links to prove that only Leptotrombidium transmit scrub typhus, I'll make a whole new article on the genus, and move the the incorrect info to the new article. Buɡboy52.4 (talk) 14:59, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for you great amount of patience, but I finally got a chance to create trombiculidae, if you need anything else, just ask! Buɡboy52.4 (talk) 03:10, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Well, if you can get me some links to prove that only Leptotrombidium transmit scrub typhus, I'll make a whole new article on the genus, and move the the incorrect info to the new article. Buɡboy52.4 (talk) 14:59, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- Hello agian. I just wanted your opinion before I continued editing, so I added info, rearranged the titles, and added a taxonomy in my sandbox, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bugboy52.40/sandbox2. Tell me what you think. Buɡboy52.4 (talk) 03:03, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Steward elections
- Thanks for your vote, for or against, and your constructive comments. Apteva (talk) 14:19, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Proposed deletion of Rufskin
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/74/Ambox_warning_yellow.svg/48px-Ambox_warning_yellow.svg.png)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Rufskin, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:
- No context
All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Babakathy (talk) 13:17, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK nomination of Leptotrombidium
Hello! Your article Leptotrombidium was recently nominated at Did you know to be featured on the main page. The nomination has now been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 18:51, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
- Just so you know, there is a little bit that needs to be clarified in the article before it can be promoted to the main page; the second paragraph (about how the mites transmit the disease to humans) is a bit unclear, and I have not been able to understand if it's saying they are not vectors, or what (or, indeed, what the difference is between a vector and a carrier). If you could rewrite that paragraph to make it a bit clearer, especially for lay readers, that would be very helpful. There is more discussion at Template talk:Did you know#Leptotrombidium. Thanks, rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 03:21, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
- Hi Gak, sorry to bother you again, but I just wanted to see if you're planning on clarifying the bit of confusing text in the Leptotrombidium article, which people are still discussing at DYK (the link I gave in my previous message). The concern is just that I'm a little confused about what the mites are classified as (vectors, reservoirs, carriers, etc?) and how they pass the disease to humans. If you could clarify that bit of the text, it would help avoid a lot of arguing :) Thanks, rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 02:11, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
- References added and clean-up template removed.--Gak (talk) 01:03, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Leptotrombidium
Congratulations! PeterSymonds (talk) 20:29, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 18:05, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Email address
Hello GAK! I have read your article about Chinese bronzes. Is it also possible to contact you via Email? Greetings from Germany --Reiner Stoppok (talk) 12:30, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
CPR
Hi there,
I saw your edit to Cardiopulmonary resuscitation earlier, and i have for the time being reverted it, and started a discussion on the article talk page on the reasons, but in a nutshell, i've looked at your source article, and I think the information you wrote is not fully supported by the source, and i think it may be in the wrong place in the article, but I do think some further information about end of life care for terminal patients in relation to CPR would be valuable. Hope you can contribute again (and my apologies for the reversion). Regards, OwainDavies (about)(talk) edited at 18:14, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Chloramphenicol
Hi Gak. When I was five years old, I was given chloramphenicol to preemptively fight a brain infection for a bad head injury. Approximately five months after the treatment, I had a large number of bruises all over my body, and my platelet count was down to about 40,000. My parents were told that I had developed aplastic anemia because of the Chloramphenicol, and would likely die. Within a month, my platelet count had doubled; it was assumed that I was one of the rare few to make a spontaneous recovery. My blood counts were found to be normal before long.
I'm in my thirties now, and have had a very hard time getting medical insurance because of this episode. The insurance companies consider me to be a 'major risk' because of the aplastic anemia diagnosis, despite the fact that I have had normal blood counts for the last 30 years. My own research seems to indicate that some people develop bone marrow suppression after a cumulative dose threshold is exceeded, and that this suppression can occur months after therapy discontinues.
I'm writing to you since you are the author of the major rewrite for the chloramphenicol article, which is largely still intact. Do you know of any good journal articles that I can send to my insurance underwriters to possibly debunk the theory that I am high risk?
I understand that the incidence of aplastic anemia in response to chloramphenicol is approximately 1 in 30,000 people, and that a full recovery from such a state is quite rare. Am I truly this rare patient, or was my reaction more easily explained? Any and all information you can supply to me is incredibly valuable, since I am currently uninsured. Thanks very much in advance for any help you can give me. Sincerely, Linda.130.13.166.168 (talk) 13:06, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks so much for your response. Yes, you are correct that I made a full recovery without a bone marrow transplant. The university near my home has a copy of the book you mentioned --- I plan to copy the relevant sections and see if I can track down the pediatric hematologist that originally diagnosed me; perhaps he can "reverse" the diagnosis and make me "insurable" once more. Thanks again for your help. Sincerely, Linda.130.13.166.168 (talk) 21:52, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
Auto-block
Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Gak! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created is tagged as an Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to this article, it would greatly help us with the current 709 article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the article:
- Chuan-Chiung Chang - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 20:41, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
History of malaria
Thank you for your contribution to history of malaria. The link you added is identical to reference 80, may be we should avoid overlinking Hempelmann (talk) 13:56, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- Oops! I did not realise that. My mistake, sorry. --Gak (talk) 12:12, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- removed link, please continue to improve the article further Hempelmann (talk) 18:34, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
File:PAS.png listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:PAS.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 03:12, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
File:Thioacetazone.png listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Thioacetazone.png, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Calliopejen1 (talk) 13:42, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
Proposed Image Deletion
A deletion discussion has just been created at Category talk:Unclassified Chemical Structures, which may involve one or more orphaned chemical structures, that has you user name in the upload history. Please feel free to add your comments. Ronhjones (Talk) 22:53, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
A new medical resource
Please note that there is a new freely accessible medical resource, MedMerits (to which I'm a medical advisor) on neurologic disorders. A discussion on ELs to MedMerits and medical ELs in general is currently in progress ("Wikipedia and its relationship to the outside world"). Presto54 (talk) 17:55, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
All files in category Unclassified Chemical Structures listed for deletion
One or more of the files that you uploaded or altered has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it/them not being deleted. Thank you.
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of MGA73 (talk) at 17:55, 28 November 2011 (UTC).
Disambiguation link notification for April 4
Hi. When you recently edited Limbic encephalitis, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page PET (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:59, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
References
Please use secondary sources per WP:MEDRS. Cheers --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 09:16, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
- Why are you not using secondary sources per WP:MEDRS? [2] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:37, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
- Was not aware of this policy.--Gak (talk) 11:50, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
- No worries. This is still a primary research study [3] and commenting on a retrospective analysis is WP:UNDUE IMO.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 12:08, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
- Why, when people are going out and buying VitD on the basis of this report?--Gak (talk) 13:20, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
- No worries. This is still a primary research study [3] and commenting on a retrospective analysis is WP:UNDUE IMO.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 12:08, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
- Was not aware of this policy.--Gak (talk) 11:50, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
- Why are you not using secondary sources per WP:MEDRS? [2] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:37, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
Your entry in [Management of Depression] regarding Chalder et al (2012) on exercise
Recently, you edited the above mentioned article and added this:
A randomised-controlled trial 361 patients published in 2012 found no benefit from exercise
You cite:
Chalder et al. “Facilitated physical activity as a treatment for depressed adults: randomised controlled trial” British Medical Journal, 2012.
Now I wonder if you've actually read the study. Because, if at all, this study shows that simply encouraging someone to exercise has no effect. Which is equal to encouraging people not to be depressed. The study has been poorly designed, and you might agree on that if you take the time to dive into the matter. A hint: the exercise group were mainly encouraged by phone and had to self-report whatever they did as exercise. "Walking to a car" or "taking the stairs" was included in the definition for exercise. Depressed people have been repeatedly shown to have poor compliance. Would you want to rely on such data to make a claim about physical exercise as a non-treatment for depression? It has been shown to reduce depression in chronically ill people http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2227111