Talk:Tick-borne encephalitis

Viruses Start‑class Mid‑importance

	Viruses portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Viruses, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of viruses 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.VirusesWikipedia:WikiProject VirusesTemplate:WikiProject Virusesvirus articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

11,000 cases a year? Where is this data taken from? Samnikal 01:32, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sorry, I'm not very good at adding references. I've got a source, a leaflet (it says 10,000 cases):

publisher: Baxter

title: "Nur FSME-Impfung schützt: Patienteninformationen"

page: 9

publication date: May 2006

It also says that about 15% of FSME patients are children under 14. Huseyx2 12:56, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

December additions

re these additions:

If "The disease is untreatable once manifest" then how can there be a treatment section? I think the former should be stating incurable as opposed to untreatable.
The large number of claims made need individual citations - 'Reference section' is for sources that act as background for the whole topic, whereas 'Footnote section' give details on sources for specific points.
Various footnote systems have been used at wikipedia, newest being the <ref>...</ref> <references/> cite.php system - see WP:FOOTNOTES.
Also PubMed links are automatically achieved using marked up of PMID abstract-number, the insertion of a colon after "PMID" prevents any hypertexting.
As it currently stands, the dumping of the unformated un-link references makes it almost impossible to workout what citation verifies which facts. This is going to need a lot of work to untangle.

My 1st instinct was to revert entirely the tangle, but would give every one nothing to work on appart from the past history version. Also there were some sensible copyediting improvements to the existing prose that User:CaliforniaLyme made, and these clearly should not be reverted - delving through 21 sequential edits is unrealistic.

So as a starter I'll have a go at marking up the sources, correct PMID coding and flag assertions that clearly need linkage to a source. Then we can try and pair up required citation within the long list of sources. Comments from other editors would be appreciated. David Ruben ^Talk 01:05, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article name/subject

The ICD 9 & 10 links clearly indicates that this article is either misnamed or needs better specify its subject. The official world disease categorisation from A84 is of "Tick-borne viral encephalitis" which includes "tick-borne viral meningoencephalitis" and then is subdivided:

A84.0 Far Eastern tick-borne encephalitis [Russian spring-summer encephalitis]
A84.1 Central European tick-borne encephalitis
A84.8 Other tick-borne viral encephalitis:
- Louping ill
- Powassan virus disease
A84.9 Tick-borne viral encephalitis, unspecified

So where is evidence that all varieties of Tick-borne viral encephalitis is caused by a single flavivirus Tick-Borne Encephalitis Virus (TBEV) ? I suspect in the rush to insert Russian research links, that what they were looking into was their specific "A84.0 Far Eastern tick-borne encephalitis [Russian spring-summer encephalitis]" rather than the group of Tick-borne viral encephalitis as a whole (e.g. PMID 10190241 which it would seem fails to fully specify which virus/illness when we consider the WHO extensive scheme) David Ruben ^Talk 02:28, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fosprenil - Phosphrenyl

Could someone research this medicine further? It appears to be a Russian brand name for "polyprenylphosphate" - some sort of "wonder drug" by the looks of it... The manufacturer's homepage can be found here: http://www.micro-plus.ru/fosprenil.htm 62.113.159.156 (talk) 16:47, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]