Talk:Amyloidosis

So, what IS Amyloidosis?

One of the things I like(d) about Wikipedia is that even laymen can look up things like "Amyloidosis" and get an idea of what it is without having to deal with the jargon of that specific area.

However, this article is incomprehensible. Someone please make it comprehensible.

Seconded. I have no idea what the heck I just read, or what the disease affects, say nothing of what it does. I got more information from the article on Robert Jordan about the disease... 71.198.127.97 23:29, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately true. I had a long battle over at Hilbert space about making the intro paragraph comprehensible to a layperson, but to no avail.

This one seems to have a similar problem: someone who already understands it would find it to be a fine article, but for someone who doesn't know what's going on, it's pretty useless.

I'll have to see if I can find the appropriate tag to get an expert in to explain it.

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 17:30, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Added {{Technical (expert)}} template.

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 17:36, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

	Ŧĥīš ǻŕţǐċĺə įŝ ţǿŧāľŀŷ ìñçôмþŕéħėŉşıßľě.
	Ÿǿü čǽñ ħëłþ Ǜŉçýċļöþęđĩä ßŷ ểǻŧıŉġ ä çåŗǐβöǚ.

well this is talk and it is relative, so you no be deletin it

What it isn't?

"CJD, Alzheimer's and diabetes are almost never referred to as amyloidoses. However, all of these diseases, as well as some other disorders, are considered to be types of proteopathy, in which structurally aberrant proteins accumulate in certain cells and tissues."

I hav no clue why these diseases wouldn't be referred to as amyloidoses. I'm reading through the whole article after that, just to see why they might not fit, but my impulse is to snip. Brewhaha@edmc.net 08:08, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article is Terrible

Completely incomprehensible with loads of spurious detail and no overview at all-the opening sentence, is laden with medical jargon and factually wrong to boot. This needs a complete rewrite. I will do this when I've got time-possibly this weekend.FelixFelix ^talk 14:04, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Felix. When it's readable to a normal mortal, please feel free to yank the template I added.

*Septegram*Talk*Contributions* 16:43, 13 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a start

Next is sorting out the organ specific amyloidoses and then referencing and expanding. Perhaps a bit on biopsy to go with the histology section, and a table of all the precursor proteins. Also a section on clinical features of the systemic amyloisoses before the organ specific ones, perhaps. Hopefully it's all becoming a bit clearer, due to drastic simplification.FelixFelix ^talk 22:20, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mortality Rate?

Is it fatal? what percentage of people die from it. Robert Jordan is one of my favorite authors, so I am really quite concerned.

Yep, they do-the mortality depends on what type they have and whether they get treatment for the underlying cause or not.FelixFelix ^talk 20:23, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RJ's gettin past it i think, he's helping test a new drug that is showing excellent results. his lamba light chains are within normal range now, but he's still dealing with it, but with less struggle than normal —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.71.190.50 (talk) 14:23, August 23, 2007 (UTC)