Talk:Common cold

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Common cold/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 21:28, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Comments

• "While a cough and a fever indicate a higher likelihood of influenza in adults, there is a great deal of similarity between these two conditions" - different viruses? (Maybe could say a little more about the difference?)

• "it may also be related to changes in the respiratory system that results in greater susceptibility" - can this be explained more?

• "This is believed to be due primarily to increased time spent indoors,..." - is there a way of getting rid of the passive voice? (There are other examples also.)

• Herd immunity - Doesn't this apply to the prevalence of vaccinations? is there a vaccination for the cold?

No, it does not apply only to vaccine-derived immunity, but naturally acquired immunity too. (See; Fine P, Eames K, Heymann DL (2011). ""Herd immunity": a rough guide". Clinical Infectious Diseases : an Official Publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. 52 (7): 911–6. doi:10.1093/cid/cir007. PMID 21427399. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)). Graham Colm (talk) 21:41, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps the text in the link Herd immunity is misleading? It's under the general category of "Cause", so the impression is that people herded together cause the spread of the cold virus, when the opposite is meant if the link is actually read.— Preceding unsigned comment added by MathewTownsend (talk • contribs)

I am not sure if my clarification helped.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:59, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

::::Perhaps the text in the link Herd immunity is misleading? It's under the general category of "Cause", so the impression is that people herded together cause the spread of the cold virus, when the opposite is meant if the link is actually read. Fixed I see.

• Yes it did. We got caught in an edit conflict.
• "regarding BTA-798" - what is BTA-798? - could "regarding" be changed to "to"?

MathewTownsend (talk) 21:28, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

GA review-see WP:WIAGA for criteria (and here for what they are not)

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose: clear and concise, correct spelling and grammar:

   B. Complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Provides references to all sources:

   B. Provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Main aspects are addressed:

   B. Remains focused:

4. Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

• A very informative and helpful article. (Even though I don't get colds, everyone around me does!) Good work! Congratulations! MathewTownsend (talk) 23:03, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

The article says "The primary method of prevention is by hand washing". I don't know if this means I can prevent other people catching my cold if I wash my hands, or if it means other people can stop themselves catching my cold if they wash their hands, or if it means I can prevent myself catching other people's colds if I wash my hands. Or does it mean I can prevent the symptoms getting very bad, after I catch a cold, by washing my hands?86.131.54.100 (talk) 22:12, 22 November 2012 (UTC) Not sure how to edit the section on economic impact, but the estimate of 20 billion dollars per year and 40% of lost work days is for people reporting to have a common cold, a number of these are in fact malingering, so if there were no common cold they would simply choose another malingering reason to stay off (eg back pain, migraine, diarrhea and vomiting etc).

Onset

This "The incubation period for a cold is usually around two to three days before symptoms start," referenced to ADAM is the same as "Symptoms typically peak two to three days after infection onset" referenced to a textbook on the subject. The textbook IMO is a better quality reference. And I have seen issues with ADAM in the past. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 16:13, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Those sentences do not mean the same thing. The first says that the earliest symptoms appear two or three days after the virus first invades and infects the host. The second says that the symptoms start to get better ("peak" means "at their worst") after two or three days.

we need to know what's actually going on here. Offhand, I suspect that the first is true (infection of the first cells to appearance of first symptoms is likely to be two or three days) and that the second is wrong, and should actually say that the symptoms peak two or three days after they first appear, which is four to six days after the first cells were invaded. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:39, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

"Infection onset" is the time one first contact the infection. Symptoms may begin with 16 hours of contact. [1] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 17:20, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

That source says that the time to the first symptom is 16 to 72 hours. Since the first symptom is taking up to three days to appear, and since we all know from our own experience that cold symptoms do not suddenly appear at full strength, but start with mild symptoms that get worse before they get better, it is not logically possible for the symptoms which begin up to 72 hours after the virus infects the person to also peak within 72 hours of that same moment. It is much more likely that the virus gets inside you on Monday, that your symptoms start on Wednesday, and that the symptoms are at their worst ("peak") on Friday. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:41, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes the sources seem to contradict each other. I will try to figure it out. I might be misinterpreting what "infection onset" means. If infection on set means the start of the symptoms or encountering the virus. I assumed the latter. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 01:13, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

This ref [2] states onset of symptoms is 1-2 days after infection and peak is 2-4 days after infection. Thus what we haveDoc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 20:02, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

"Catching a cold"

In the subsection "Weather" of section "Cause" the common folk theory about "catching a cold" is discussed. I think the findings of the following article should be mentioned:

R. Gordon Douglas, Jr., Keith M. Lindgren, and Robert B. Couch, N. Engl. J. Med. 279:742-747 (1968).

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM196810032791404

In this study, the test subjects were infected with rhinovirus while some of them were exposed to cold. The study "demonstrated no effect of exposure to cold on host resistance to rhinovirus infection and illness that could account for the commonly held belief that exposure to cold influences or causes common colds."

130.233.174.38 (talk) 16:36, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

We typically try to use references from the last 10 years. Anything newer? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 22:51, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Differentiating signs and symptoms

Could someone please edit this article to reflect the difference between signs (changes in the body that are visible and or measurable, eg. fever, spots, runny nose, redness, blood count abnormalities, radiographic abnormalities) and symptoms (effects of an illness that are perceived by the patient and not apparent to an observer eg. pain, numbness, lassitude, blurred vision) In the lede there is reference to symptoms and then goes on to mention 'runny nose', 'fever' and 'sputum colour', all of which are signs. There are several similar clarifications needed further on in the article. Uner 'management' - 'symptomatic' there is reference to a 'runny nose' being a symptom. It is more precis to call it a sign. Thank you. I'd be happy if you respond here.Richard Avery (talk) 13:47, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes technically. But in common usage symptoms is often used to also mean signs (or short for signs and symptoms). Thus do not see this as a huge issue.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 15:36, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Technically, a runny nose is a symptom if the patient reports it (e.g., over the phone) and a sign if someone else sees it. What value do you see in trying to draw a bright line between the two in this article? WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:34, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Broad-spectrum viral / infection identification?

Is there any broad spectrum medical testing method currently available for all viruses of every known type to be identified? How do you tell the difference between a rhinovirus, a flu virus, and mononucleosis? Severity of symptoms is a vague classification method that is almost useless for clearly and exactly identifying the true cause.

With all the talk of research into sophisticated biochips and all that, it seems like it should be possible to do a single low-cost blood test that identifies everything currently in the blood, including concentration levels of all active antibodies, to determine what a person is currently infected with.

-- DMahalko (talk) 11:54, 8 October 2012 (UTC)