User talk:Mikael Häggström

Archives

1 - 2

Barnstar!

		The Special Barnstar
		You are rewarded with this Barnstar for your contributions to Diabetes mellitus type 1. Well done! This lousy T-shirt (talk) 22:26, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks =-) Mikael Häggström (talk) 06:43, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Smooth Muscle

Thanks for working on Smooth Muscle. As you may note I've expanded the article from the orginal stub, but haven't added references. Parts maybe too technical for an encyclopedic article or too long. I did start adding references to the Talk page, but I have a lot more to add. I would like to reorganize and expand the whole article, and I made a few notes on the Talk page in that regard. Anything you can do to improve the article would be great. Regards GetAgrippa (talk) 03:10, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions to that article too. Surely, the article needs more referenced information, so I'm sure a further reorganization and expansion is for the better. Cheers. Mikael Häggström (talk) 05:05, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of DOT cancellation test for deletion

The article DOT cancellation test is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DOT cancellation test until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. JFW | T@lk 20:15, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. I made a comment there. Mikael Häggström (talk) 04:55, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Signal transduction pathways.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Signal transduction pathways.jpg, 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. 62.243.126.154 (talk) 15:40, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification. I've commented there. Mikael Häggström (talk) 17:26, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Imagenes (cannabis)

Hola, me dirigo con el fin, de pedirle permiso para publicar una imagen de los efectos fisicos del cannabis, basicamente es su imagen pero traducí el texto al español, me gustaria que me dijera si no hay ningun tipo de inconveniente para que la suba obviamente usted tendra el credito como creador User:zetaalberto

Supongo que quieres decir con esta imagen. Te doy todo el permiso para usar la imagen para hacer derivados. Buena suerte. Mikael Häggström (talk) 14:39, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Another image

I have started working on Scabies again. Wondering if you could create a diagram like we see on this page? Of the human figure with areas shaded.. [1] Thanks. --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:16, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Good job there! It turned out an image there that demonstrates the sites is from a government source, and, as nothing seems to indicate anything else, it can be used directly. I made an adaption of it in Scabies#Rash. I hope it works well. Mikael Häggström (talk) 12:07, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Location of CGG repeats

Just want to let you know that Fragile X syndrome is caused by CGG repeats, but the CGG repeat is located in the 5' untranslated region.

Thanks. I made a note about that in File:Notable mutations.svg, which I guess you refer to. Mikael Häggström (talk) 10:55, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hi Mikael,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Blood values sorted by mass and molar concentration.png is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on March 25, 2011. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2011-03-25. howcheng {chat} 18:12, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

I feel very honored to see this picture having been selected as a Picture of the Day. I think the caption looks all well. Good work! Mikael Häggström (talk) 18:53, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Following up on the blood test ranges, graphics, etc.

Fantastic infographics! Really outstanding. Love the SVG charts in the blood test ranges. Would love to know how you went from chart data (Excel?) to SVG (Inkscape?)

Was wondering with your medical background if there are any reliable reference ranges of sex hormones levels (perhaps others) as an infant grows and goes through the various stages of "Psycho-sexual development" (see chart below).

For instance, in the Phallic stage (age 3-6) some of the psychiatry theorists postulate a little girl starts out pretty much like a "tomboy". Has pretty much male like power/dominating traits with which she identifies with, and wants to possess in herself. She is postulated to be attracted to Mom "psycho-sexually" from pretty much a male prospective ("I go outside the home for conquering and adventure and you stay home and tend to the nurturing, homemaking and baby tending.") She competes with Dad for Mom's attentions on some sexual level. She then undergoes a very radical shift to "femininity". After that occures the little girl is strongly attracted to Dad psycho-sexually, and competes with Mom for his attention.

At the completion of her Electra complex she "forfeits" having Dad all to herself, and knows that Mom securely has him. She then starts the search outside the family for a possible mate. At that "resolved" point she somewhat returns to identifying with Mom, (birds of a feather gender wise) and relates / learns from her feminine charms how to attract someone like Dad. (After all, Mom's charms worked well in getting Dad as a mate...those can work for me too...)

O.K. I'll admit to the strictly scientific mind all the "Psycho-sexual development" theory can seem pretty crazy. However it would be interesting to start testing out some of those "age old" theories against real changes in sex hormones. I postulate you could not have the radical changes going on in "the mind" without corresponding radical changes in the sex hormones? It would be quite interesting to see VISUALLY how the various sex hormones changed through that period in particular. Would it be sharp and dramatic, as your SVG charts show of the female monthly cycle? Would the hormonal changes align with and support, or basically refute the psycho-sexual development theories?

My rough biological understanding is all humans start out basically female, however with the X chromosome at an early point in development get bathed in different hormones that cause sex differentiation over to the Male side. I further understand (at least from the psychiatrist's prospective) that all humans are to some extent bi-sexual That is, all males have at least some token "female" traits, and all females have at least some token "male" traits. This is pretty obvious, even when you look at gay and lesbian couples - one typically is more "male" and the other more "female". Can some of this be reliably traced to differential hormone levels? Would tracing the hormone levels through the "psycho-sexual development" stages perhaps illuminate errors or further complexities in that model?

I'll admit right now that general gender differences (or similarities) is a whole area subject to endless, heated social debate, so I'll state right up front I have no personal interest in that discussion. When I say "Male" or "Female" characteristic here I make no value judgment. I only mean to get at gender trait differences that can actually be reasonably measured and nearly universally agreed to as strongly statistically significant. Perhaps "male" and "female" trait descriptions themselves could be better informed by what differences are found in the base sexual hormones?

At any rate I thought some of your great visualization technology might be particularly useful to illustrate this. If there is the table data available for hormones reference levels by age and sex through the various development stages it would not be too hard to put together. I'm quite sure you could easily publish your findings.

Rick (talk) 17:09, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Reference: Following chart is from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychosexual_development

Stage	Age Range	Erogenous zone	Consequences of psychologic fixation
Oral	Birth–1 year	Mouth	Orally aggressive: chewing gum and the ends of pencils, etc. Orally Passive: smoking, eating, kissing, oral sexual practices Oral stage fixation might result in a passive, gullible, immature, manipulative personality.
Anal	1–3 years	Bowel and bladder elimination	Anal retentive: Obsessively organized, or excessively neat Anal expulsive: reckless, careless, defiant, disorganized, coprophiliac
Phallic	3–6 years	Genitalia	Oedipus complex (in boys) Electra complex (in girls)
Latency	6–puberty	Dormant sexual feelings	Sexual unfulfillment if fixation occurs in this stage.
Genital	Puberty–death	Sexual interests mature	Frigidity, impotence, unsatisfactory relationships

I'm glad you like the chart! As to the secret in "converting" all those values from table numbers to a diagram, I simply added them one by one - I know it would have been way faster with some kind of converter, but I've found none with that specific function.

That's a very interesting topic. Sex hormones, and possibly fluctuations in it, certainly must play a major role in psychological and psychosexual changes in childhood. I found no specific sex hormone values for these ages of interest in the articles gonadarche, Puberty#Major_hormones, estrogen or testosterone. I'm certain there are studies on it out there, and if any is found, then I'm sure each one of these articles would benefit from a note on this - perhaps Psychosexual development too. I'd probably add it to the blood values article as well and, if there's space for it in there, in the diagram. Mikael Häggström (talk) 18:40, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Redirect of brand names to generics?

Was a bot every made to do this? Uptodate / Lexicomp has a great database brand names to generic names.--Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:09, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

There is such a bot, User:PotatoBot. My redirections are mainly from its log of names that could not be redirected automatically. I think it's still running through a list from DrugBank, but another one may be needed later. Mikael Häggström (talk) 05:14, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Great where is the drugbank list? --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:36, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

It's originally from http://www.drugbank.ca/downloads. I'm not sure if the file in use by the bot is still there, but this full database file seems at least very similar. Mikael Häggström (talk) 05:58, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Wondering if I could get your comments

[2] --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:54, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I made a comment there. Good idea. Mikael Häggström (talk) 06:23, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Are you good with template markup? I do not have that much experience with it. Posted a couple others for help as well.--Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:35, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm not really that experienced in designing infoboxes. I hope (and I'm pretty sure) someone with more experience will reply to you. Mikael Häggström (talk) 06:51, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

D-value (transport)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of D-value (transport), and it appears to be a substantial copy of http://d-value.com.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 05:09, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Good job. See my reply at Talk:D-value (transport). Mikael Häggström (talk) 05:13, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

I came across the file Child Development Stages and just wanted to drop you a quick note to you, its creator. It's useful (and aesthetically pleasing as well) and quite well executed. Thank you! Herostratus (talk) 16:33, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you I'm happy to hear you like it. Mikael Häggström (talk) 03:45, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Person verses patient

Hey Mikael just a quick note, person is usually preferred over patient (gout article). Already fixed it. Other than that keep up the good work... Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:58, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! It's sometimes easy to forget that I tend to write from a "doctor's point of view". Kudos to your work too Mikael Häggström (talk) 03:39, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Human Body Diagrams Listing Side-effects of Caffeine

Someone else (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Caffeine#Effects_When_Taken_in_Moderation) noticed that the symptoms listed on this diagram aren't at all consonant with the symptoms listed anywhere else in the medical literature. I got to sleuthing around a bit, and I think I've discovered what the problem is. The cited reference doesn't cite any sources, so it's difficult to ascertain where they got the information for the monograph. However, this site has information that is similarly out-of-the-ordinary, and cites a source--namely, the product information insert for Cafcit (caffeine citrate) for intravenous administration. So I used Google to find the insert here, and it turns out that all these strange side-effects are from a study of its use for apnea of prematurity in preterm infants, not in adults. It looks like someone at Medline in 2000 made a rather glaring mistake, and the graphic has some rather glaring errors in it, as a result. This is a more accurate list from which you could generate a replacement graphic. Blahdenoma (talk) 00:33, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the notification, as well as the detective work both in finding the original error of the previous source, and finding a new source! I've inserted a replacement image in both the Caffeine and coffee articles: File:Effects of moderate caffeine consumption.svg. I took the references directly from what I found when scrolling through the Caffeine article. The new medscape source would have worked too, but many entries there seemed to belong to excessive usage or overdose, and the latter are specifically dealt by File:Main symptoms of Caffeine overdose.png. Again, thanks. Mikael Häggström (talk) 15:31, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for tracts of spinal cord

Just thought I'd take a minute to thank you for your image of the tracts of the spinal cord. I'm a med student at Washington University and our teachers and TAs have been using it a lot in our neuro class. mcs (talk) 02:23, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm always delighted to hear that the images are found useful Mikael Häggström (talk) 05:11, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Non-cancer chemotherapy

The article Non-cancer chemotherapy does not contain any useful information. It is not a topic that is independently notable under that name. I think it makes more sense to move the content back to chemotherapy but place it in the "history" section. The word "chemotherapy" without a modifier nowadays only refers to cancer treatment, but its historical meaning is broader. In the UK, the term "anti-tuberculosis chemotherapy" (ATC) is still in use, but more as a fossil to its original use. JFW | T@lk 05:31, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I agree that would probably be a more appropriate place. I made a comment at Talk:Chemotherapy#Non-cancer_chemotherapy. Mikael Häggström (talk) 05:43, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

integrated care

I replied at Talk:Integrated care. Thanks. Jesanj (talk) 22:03, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply Mikael Häggström (talk) 09:47, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

And thank you for yours. =) Jesanj (talk) 14:12, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your graphics

Hi Mikael, I just want to bring many thanks from Chinese Wikipedia editors to you. We are translating medical articles, and your graphics are significantly helpful for explaining these. If possible, we also would like to translate your graphics into Chinese. Although most medical articles in Zh-wiki are in stub status, you and your contribution still provide us much courage for overcoming these difficulties. Thank you! --Walter Grassroot |talk 21:16, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm honored by your cheering message. I wish you all the best with the continuing creation of the Chinese Wikipedia. If I knew more of the Chinese language, I would have been happy to contribute some myself You are welcome to ask for help if you need any formatting or editing of any image in order to be able to translate it. Mikael Häggström (talk) 09:54, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Evolution essentials

Template:Evolution essentials has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:02, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree. It's no longer of any use. Mikael Häggström (talk) 11:11, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Standard & Poor's

Ahh, Mikael, you've got to give me more than that. Standard & Poor's made a serious mistake this weekend. They've been making serious mistakes like this since at least 2008, when they ranked Lehman AAA right before its collapse. I care because a lot of peoples' money is at stake, and a lot of peoples' money is at stake starting later this afternoon (EST) when the Asian markets open. When the main page of Wikipedia says, without criticism, that Standard & Poor's downgraded the US credit rating, it's become part of this problem, and the solution isn't as easy as replacing my obvious bias with something that doesn't make any sense to most people. Now I can, and will, edit the Standard & Poor's page to say more explicitly that they screwed up in '08, with a citation or two, even. But right now, if I've got money in Treasury bonds and I make my way to the Wikipedia home page, what I actually read is that the United States' ability to repay its debts has gone, which is incorrect. It would be dumb of me to then sell my bonds, because they will rebound. But, the New York Times headline this morning begins, "Amid Criticism, S&P," and someone else should have made this change before I did. We have to do better, and we will do better. Thanks for your consideration; I am, after all, new at this. Randnotell (talk) 08:18, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

You have many good points there, and you've certainly got more expertise regarding the economy of the United States than I do. I think the most appropriate is to discuss the matter at the article's talk page in order to hear what others have to say in the matter, so I started one at Talk:United States public debt#Presentation of Standard & Poor's. Mikael Häggström (talk) 08:29, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

And Mike, if I can call you Mike, I imagine that you are better at writing articles about Swedish medicine than I am, especially if the articles are in Swedish. Thanks for pointing me to the right talk page! Randnotell (talk) 08:52, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

You're right about that Sure you can call me Mike if you wish. Thank you for your contributions! Mikael Häggström (talk) 11:45, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Mike, I gotta ask, why the removal of the Playbook quotes? I would argue this issue is sufficiently complex enough to be added as a new article, you know, 2011 S&P downgrade, or something like that. And the Playbook quotes may use "weasel words" but no one else on the Web has told the story as well as Allen does. And I would further argue that I don't know how to make a new article, but rather than "nominating" it and waiting for permission from everybody, since this is a rapidly evolving topic, if you know how, you might want to go ahead and make it, and ask forgiveness, not permission. Be bold, as they say! Randnotell (talk) 02:01, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with the removal of the Playbook quotes, and I don't know the chances of such an article to remain in wiki-space, but I think you can give it a try to make one. There's the Wikipedia:Article wizard that gives a lot of help in how to do it. Mikael Häggström (talk) 08:58, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

That is so perfect, thank you very much! I very much appreciate your help throughout this process, Mike.Randnotell (talk) 22:58, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

And thank you for your contribution with that article Is it the first one you started? It looks very good Don't let any negative peer-review make you doubt your potential for writing. If I get some time I could make some additional edits to it, but I'm a bit busy now. Mikael Häggström (talk) 05:56, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

No, the first one I worked on was the Westminster article, you can see in my talk page. I suppose it was the first one I started, though. I appreciate your support, and good luck with medicine in Sweden! Sweden's a neat country.

Randnotell (talk) 16:34, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Now it's a different conversation

Mike, if I may, what kind of medicine are you studying? Randnotell (talk) 21:27, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Also, do you know how I can get the Wikipedia talk page to not send emails to my personal address? That is, when someone posts on my talk page, I would prefer that I not be notified by email. Randnotell (talk) 21:53, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Right now, I'm studying all kinds of conventional medicine, but I hope to continue specializing in obstetrics and gynecology in the future. And you, what kind of subjects are you studying?

You can change the "E-mail options" at the Special:Preferences page, which you find at the very top of the screen. Mikael Häggström (talk) 09:33, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Pre- and posttest probability, some reflections

Dear Sir, I read the article 'Pre- and post-test probability' on Wikipedia. I am convinced that the negative predictive value never equals the pretest probability. In making abstraction of every other information than the test result (other test(s), history, questions, physical examination a.s.o.) the negative predictive value equals the complement of the negative predictive value. Under the same mentioned condition the positive posttest probability equals indeed the positive predictive value. So I suggest that the text should be changed taking in account this remark. Moreover the text is written from a point of view that such a thing as an accurate pretest and posttest probability should exist but since such a notion is not defined in the text, the text ends up in some parts in being quite confusing. I suggest that we rewrite the text in cooperation. My adress is: Soete Michel, Brugsesteenweg 68, 8420 Wenduine Belgium. I you write me a letter with your consent I wil send you a letter containing my e-mail adress. This should offer us the opportunity to discuss things without their remaining on internet wich makes it sometimes more comfortable to discuss. Sincerely yours,

Michel soete (talk) 10:27, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Dear Michel soete,

I'd be pleased if the article could be benefited with your thoughts. I'd gladly exchange letters with you if it makes you more comfortable. What kind of consent do you have in mind that I send to you?

Best regards,

Mikael Häggström (talk) 13:45, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Dear Sir, The consent I meant was that you agree to allow to discuss the problem via e-mail. Without a first letter I cannot know your e-mail adress nor can I know if you allow to be contacted by e-mail. One letter will suffice, I guess. Further communication can happen by e-mail. Sincerely yours,

Michel soete (talk) 17:24, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Page number

Could you provide page numbers for the data in this edit?[3] JFW | T@lk 20:12, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I can't, because the table was included in a lecture handout, and I traced it to the book by googling the text, which exactly matched text in that book - [4]. Do you think it's acceptable? Mikael Häggström (talk) 06:23, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Hmm. Ideally the page number should be available to facilitate verifiability. Perhaps someone at the Resource Exchange has access to a copy. JFW | T@lk 19:29, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

My library has it off-site, I can request it if needed. But I'm not sure how needle/haystack it will be to find the text. DMacks (talk) 19:52, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

I found similar data at Medscape, and used it as a reference instead, at least until this book can be verified. I made an entry at Talk:Acute_myeloid_leukemia#Reference_for_relative_incidences_of_FAB_types where we may continue the discussion. Mikael Häggström (talk) 05:26, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Forced line-break

This edit seems like a bad idea. When I look at the page, the cell renders as:

acute erythroid leukemias, including erythroleukemia (M6a)
and
very rare pure erythroid leukemia (M6b)

What's the intent here? DMacks (talk) 19:41, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

My intent was that, without that tag, the long entry in that box pushes the cytogenics- and incidence-columns far to the right, so it may be difficult to track each subtype to its cytogenics and incidence. However, on second thought, it may not be necessary, so I reverted it. Mikael Häggström (talk) 05:34, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Template:Health care

I just did what I thought was a good cleanup and I thought you may want to take a look or make some changes. Thanks. Jesanj (talk) 13:55, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

I think it looks all well. Good work! I think it was a good thing to keep only the most essential entries to avoid template creep. Surely, equipment and all that can still be found by clicking through the remaining links. Mikael Häggström (talk) 15:32, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Your (truly energetic) help needed

Dear Dr Mikael Haggstrom, Thanks for helping me edit the 'infertility in PCOS'. However my contributions to the 'PCOS" page which patients frequently read has been changed (since august 11, 2011) by an obviously non-medical person. I am a 48 year old doctor (radiologist, in South India) and would like your help in that page too. In my daily practice I see alot of young women with PCOS, who get it simply by eating too much of trans fat containing fast food. Since many of of these women are computer savvy. I used to advise them to read 'trans fats' and 'PCOS' in Wikipedia. In my experience asking infertile patients to avoid trans fats totally has been very successful in their treatment. Do add the 'PCOS' page to your watchlist. Thanking You Dr William Fullinfaw MBBS, MD(RD) - username 'fullwill'; email-fullwill@gmail.com Fullwill (talk) 15:55, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Dear Dr William Fullinfaw

Thank you for notifying me on this issue. I'm not a doctor myself, but by having a look at the article, it appears to me that the two sources ([5] and [6]) for the text that described a causative link between trans fats and PCOS actually had not studied on people with PCOS, so their conclusions wouldn't be valid for such people. Still, you are free to search for studies that target PCOS specifically.

Best regards

Mikael Häggström (talk) 04:13, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

You'll want to see User talk:WhatamIdoing#A_.28trans_fat_filled.29_cookie_for_you.21. Fullwill has decided that Wikipedia is a great way to spread the word about a hypothesis that has been unfairly neglected and suppressed by the scholarly community. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:59, 20 September 2011 (UTC)