Jump to content

Talk:Saliva hormone testing

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Mtaitus (talk | contribs) at 19:48, 3 February 2010. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Possibly useful sources

Although most of the page was basically an advertisement for a process which is seen as medically virtually worthless, there are some sources here - they're mostly popular, but there might be something that can be used. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules:simple/complex 12:12, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello


I am responding to your reasoning for not posting the majority of the content for our proposed Wikipedia page on Saliva Hormone Testing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saliva_hormone_testing). We were advised that the process is "medically virtually worthless," an opinion that we wish to dispute.


As our paper stated, there are many applications for this testing that are currently in use and are being considered for future applications. The purpose of our article was to merely inform about the process, to present these applications and the science behind it. By claiming it to be medically virtually worthless debases all of the resources that are supporting the process.


It also does not allow Wikipedia to be impartial in its presentation of information. Wikipedia should be presenting all sides of any issue instead of limiting the content to just one viewpoint. It is a great disservice to not present all angles to readers so that they are properly informed as to what sciences exist and allow them to make their own decisions. After all, that is the job of reference information, for which Wikipedia is just another vehicle.


Additionally we were told that our sources might have some useful value, which leads us to believe that the content should be just as useful because it is from these sources that we developed this content. How can the sources be useful but not its resulting content?


We can certainly understand not using the content for commercial purposes, but our mention of the product merely demonstrates one way that the process is being used. It can pave the way for other contributors to add different ways the process is being applied in the medical world of diagnostic testing. We would be doing a tremendous disservice by not presenting the advances that science is making in this arena, and the applications that are utilizing these discoveries.


We took the liberty of reviewing the content on bioidentical hormone replacement therapy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioidentical_hormone_replacement_therapy). This content is relevant in just one aspect of saliva hormone testing, but does not present the entire picture of the process. By not providing this information, we are not properly educating our readers on everything that is out there in the medical world. This is our job to present this information without prejudice or persuasion, which we are trying to do. It would behoove you to allow this to be consumed by your readers for the purpose of awareness and education. Therefore, I would kindly suggest that you reconsider posting this content in its original format. We look forward to your unbiased response shortly.