|Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Epileptic seizure.
|WikiProject Epilepsy||(Rated C-class, Top-importance)|
|WikiProject Medicine / Neurology||(Rated C-class, High-importance)|
- 1 There
- 2 Grand mal/petit mal
- 3 Management
- 4 Types
- 5 Seizures Hints
- 6 engine seizure
- 7 The WikiStandard
- 8 Let The Readers Decide
- 9 Physical examination
- 10 Should someone with epileptic seizures be alone?
- 11 Question
- 12 Huh?
- 13 What is a convulsion?
- 14 Add Content
- 15 Cleaning up this and related articles
- 16 Suggested move to Epileptic seizure
- 17 Suggested move of a disambiguation page to Seizure
- 18 Reviews
- 19 The term "fit" is deragatory
- 20 Dog responding to seizures.
- 21 Poorly written
- 22 Putting objects in sufferer's mouth / tongue-swallowing myth
- 23 Epidemiology
- 24 intro
- 25 Lifespans
- 26 Ketogenic diet
There is a question whether "temporal lobe epilepsy" (the more common term these days is "partial complex") is actually overdiagnosed in surrealists and individuals sympathetic to surrealism who are self-consciously attempting to practice surrealist theory, particularly as regards the interictal aspects of TLE (though the notion of an "interictal personality" has come under some question). The practice of automatism, for instance, tends by its nature to result in hypergraphia, and, moreover, the founder of surrealism, Andre Breton, wrote that "here as elsewhere, quality becomes a function of quantity" and "there is no subject upon which one should refuse to speak and write voluminously." Daniel C. Boyer — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) approx. 15:43, 25 February 2002 (UTC)
Added external link to my article on temporal-lobe epilepsy and surrealism in Brand X.
Mention of automatisms in particular should bring up question about existence of the Pre-automatic dictatorship. --Daniel C. Boyer — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 10:03, 7 June 2002 (UTC)
How do these surrealists manage to fool the EEG into recording epileptical activity if they don't really have EEG. Even NES don't show up as epileptical activity — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 16:34, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Grand mal/petit mal
I noticed that petit mal seizure has its own article, and assumed that the link provided at the bottom there for grand mal seizure meant that the latter also has a seperate article. Oops. siafu 18:36, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I've largely replaced the text here. The phrase "semi supine position" is probably unintelligable to 99% of the population and the recovery position is well known and recommended. In addition, the advice to "apply strong upward pression on the chin" goes against recommended treatment and is potentially dangerous. Finally, the need to call paramedics is overstated, causing additional embarrasment to those with epilepsy who have a typical seizure.
I am aware the Wikipedia is not a First Aid Manual. However, removing this section will merely perpetuate the ignorance of the general public in treating seizures. The section "Responding to a seizure" in epilepsy covers similar ground. IMO, the focus of the two articles is not currently well defined, with the epilepsy article covering much that should be in the seizure article. --Colin 21:20, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure, but I heard of a treatment in psychology class where there was some kind of left-brain right-brain ectomy to stop some kind of seizure. I'm not familiar with the term, but it involved cutting the connections that where between the left and right brain. Just wondering if anyone knew the info. I'll look through my old notes just to make sure I'm simply remembering something else from psych.
- Have a look at epilepsy – surgical treatment. You are probably thinking of callosotomy --Colin 09:34, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
- You're thinking of a hemispherectomy. They are performed mostly in kids because their brains can recover. They also do resecting and lobectomies in adults. -SP
Seizure response dog
I think the bit at the end about animals sensing seizures before they happen is at best controversial. -paul 22/4/06
It is extremely controversial and actually ridiculous. -Rob 30 May 06
- Agreed: unnecessary, bordering on ridiculous. Preacherdoc 21:57, 30 May 2006 (UTC)Preacherdoc
The first aid treatment for sezure is don't touch or press the patient, don't put any thing into the patient's mouth and remove all dangerous stuff away from the patient. When the patient finished with the fit, put the patient into a recovery position, by put one hand under the patient's head and another hand acroos over the body,the led of the side that the arm across over also across the body so that the patient will have a good airway and won't roll around, if the patient is unconscious. Then call the ambulance if there's injuries to the patient or the fit lasted for more than 5 minutes or another fit start. Fist aider of St. John Ambulance
The terms here are out-of-date. Phrases such as "petit-mal" and "grand-mal" were consigned to the medical history books long ago. The International League Against Epilepsy have classified seizures and defined the terms used by doctors today. This section would be much improved if it was more complete and used the modern terms. There is duplication here with the epilepsy article section "Types of Seizures". I think the section belongs here and the epilepsy article should concentrate on seizure disorders, associated diseases and chronic management of the condition. --Colin 21:20, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
- Agree 100%. Epilepsy classification by etiology and syndrome; seizure classification by clinical semiology; up-to-date ILAE terminology in either case; with 'grand mal' and 'petit mal' defined for historical reasons. I'll undertake to do this sometime when I have 4 or 5 hours free unless there are further objections. -Ikkyu2 21:36, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
Sorry to be an uninformed person here, but can anyone exactly say what a seizure is. I had some in 2004 so I really still do not understand any of the information provided. Send the info to my chat box if anyone knows it. Is it a cause in a person's attitude, a change of mentallity, a sexual thing that occurs from certain sensations, or a taste of liquids?--Zhang Liao 06:42, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
I don't know where else to say this, but I got rid of the "seizure warning" section on this page, because this could make EVERYONE sick by watching it. That is not a good idea to have a site such as that there, I might have a tiny tiny bit of med-induced seizure side effects, but watching that for a split second made me sick, and I had to cover my eyes just to close the link. For everyone's safety, and particularly for epileptics, I deleted that section.
- In a seizure, the pistons expand from too much heat, become too big for the walls of the cylinders, seize them, melt to them sometimes, and lock the engine and rear wheel and start the whole cycle into a skid. -- Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance
According to Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales, NPOV is "absolute and non-negotiable."
This is an attributable entry and the facts contained herein are non-negotiable and such fact cannot be hotly disputed. It is not a strong view, just a presentation of fact. It is NOT original thought nor opinion.
I have responded unfavorably to (hope this has been resolved on my talk page) Jfdwolff who demanded the following:
"Unless you can demonstrate unequivocally that the professional societies approve the use of cannabis for seizures, or you can demonstrate that a very large subgroup of epilepsy patients uses cannabis specifically to prevent seizures, I'd very much like you to keep this material out of Wikipedia."
Tampering with this entry constitutes
- An act contrary to Wikipedia's standard
- A strong view contrary to referenced and attributable fact
- Conspiracy to withhold referenced information from the public
- An illogical bias towards a medical profession of proven malice for profit
- A malicious action against sick people that carries liability for that action
Therefore I have every right to add referenced Federation Proceedings AND everyone has the right to view referenced Federation Proceedings
- I have removed the "Federation Proceedings" section from the article. There have been literally thousands of trials of drugs for their anticonvulsant effect. Even aspirin has been shown to have anticonvulsant properties. The study that had been added was over 50 years old and involved only 5 very sick children. It is not statistically relevant. There is modern research that indicates some anticonvulsant effect from cannabis and its ingredients. However, it may make some seizure types worse and the side effects may be worse than other established drugs. This research may one day lead to an effective treatment for some seizure types. We are not there yet and Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. See  and  for some lay comment and  for a professional review. There is no "conspiracy" of WP editors. Colin°Talk 22:03, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
- A personal attack is when someone is forced to take poisons you support and demand are the only treatment in existence. That is a personal attack on everyone that does harm and personal injury. In preventing the dissemination of real information you attack AND harm thousands and deserve any response of words that comes your way as a result. Alphaquad 19:02, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Let The Readers Decide
Information of trials showing a treatment that produced results that were unachievable with traditional treatment is a threat to your agenda and is a threat to the credibility of the ludicrous medical profession of symptom assassination and its ignorance of proper treatment, nothing more than a cover-up.
You would jump at the chance to present the information if you actually cared about people. Clearly your agenda is more important than the health of others, which fits within the definition of conspiracy to present only your biased position. This is demonstrated by the invention of unwritten guidelines. Such was as length remark in Talk:Anticonvulsant. It does not go unnoticed.
When the written guidelines are not in dispute, you invent unwritten guidelines to fit your agenda of conspiracy to withhold this vital information.
"NPOV says that the article should fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by a verifiable source, and should do so in proportion to the prominence of each."
Federation Proceedings is not only a significant viewpoint but also references more than a single trial. If you actually read it, in an unbiased fashion, you might see that. It is not of only 5 children as suggested.
The unprofitable drugs of traditional medicine, is connected to trials far older than 50 years. The suggestion that "it may make some seizure types worse..." is only another invented opinion presented to validate your weak and limited position, has no basis in fact and is without reference. Clearly more drivel contrary to guidelines. You harp about guidelines but cannot adhere to them.
Deletion of the entry "Federation Proceedings" is in conflict with the WP:NPOV#Undue weight of the Seizure article. The real undue weight is on the part of presenting only what you want to see.
Calling you on your act of conspiracy is not a personal attack but a description of your biased behavior.
The verifiable info is here for readers to be the judge since you continue to block its proper use in the article to fit an agenda.
Jean P. Davis M.D., and H.H. Ramsey, M.D.
The demonstration of anticonvulsant activity of the tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) cogeners by laboratory tests (Loewe and Goodman, Federation Proc. 6:352, 1947) prompted clinical trial in five institutionalized epileptic children. All of them had symptomatic grand mal epilepsy with retardation; three has cerebral palsy in addition. EEG tracings were grossly abnormal in the entire group; three has focal seizure activity. Their attacks had been inadequately controlled on 0.13 gm. of Phenobarbital daily, combined with 0.3 gm. of Dilantin per day in two of the patients, and in a third, with 0.2 gm. of Mesantoin daily.
Two isomeric 3(1,2-dimethyl heptyl) homologs of THC were tested, numbers 122 and 125A, with ataxia potencies 50 and 8 times, respectively, that of natural Marijuana principles. Number 122 was given to 2 patients for 3 weeks and to 3 patients for 7 weeks. 3 responded at least as well to previous therapy; the 4th became almost completely and the 5th entirely seizure free. One patient transferred to 125A after 3 weeks, had prompt exacerbation of seizures during the ensuing 4 weeks, despite dosages up to 4 mg. daily. The 2nd patient transferred to 125A was adequately controlled on this dosage, except for a brief period of paranoid behavior three and a half weeks later; similar episodes had occurred prior to cannabinol therapy. Other psychic disturbances or toxic reactions were not manifested during the periods of treatment. Blood counts were normal. The cannabinoids herein reported deserve further trial in non-institutionalized epileptics. Reprinted from Federation Proceedings, Federation of American Society for Experimental Biology, vol 8, 1949, p.284.
Your true colors have been seen and can only be covered up through improper deletion of this talk page entry. Will that be your next act of conspiracy? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alphaquad (talk • contribs) 05:34, 20 March 2007 (UTC).
- The above trial did not involve "traditional treatment". There is no tradition of use, nor are "isomeric 3(1,2-dimethyl heptyl) homologs of THC" anything other than the precise products of the pharmaceutical industry. Colin°Talk 19:39, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
- What you cant understand English text? The "traditional treatment" it involved (it has to be spelled out for you), was that of "Their attacks had been inadequately controlled on 0.13 gm. of Phenobarbital daily, combined with 0.3 gm. of Dilantin per day in two of the patients, and in a third, with 0.2 gm. of Mesantoin daily". In layman's terms, it did not work. "... products of the pharmaceutical industry". What's your point? It was working and they used marijuana has their guide. You're really starting to sound somewhat challenged in your ability to understand the text.
- There is no tradition. Duh of course not. Not since the 1937 Hemp Tax Transfer Law – a conspiracy of worshipping at the alter of Mammon and here as well. This alone would wake a caring person enough to the see the light as it were. Seems we must exclude you from that group huh? "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter"
- Note of confirmation for this: From clandestine research Edgewood Arsenal, Maryland, Dr. Sim reported to Medical World News: "Marijuana… is probably the most potent anti-epileptic known to medicine today". Marijuana Medical Handbook, Todd Mikuriya, M.D. And we should ignore this public announcement for what reason, because of the media manipulations of disinformation inducing a lack of tradition and for the conspiracy of the FDA/DEA in blocking all research? "I don't think so Tim" Alphaquad 12:04, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- Ah. I misinterpreted your use of the phrase "traditional treatment" which is often used wrt "traditional remedies" ie. plants. Apologies. The opinion of one pro-Marijuana MD who managed to get a book published by a minor publisher isn't notable enough. He's clearly exaggerating since there haven't been enough studies and what there have been haven't shown such spectacular results. However, as I've indicated previously, there is research on this issue. Have a look at this paper. I'll have a think about this and may incorporate something very brief into the epilepsy article where is more applicable than this article. It isn't likely to deviate from the conclusions in that paper. Colin°Talk 12:38, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
"Insufficiently controlled" may well mean that seizure frequency is reduced but not a lot. Modern anti-epileptics are really quite good.
I would not take the Marijuana Medical Handbook to be a reliable source. Conspiracies are only encyclopedic if they are confirmed conspiracies, not just some theory by someone. JFW | T@lk 12:06, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- You mean as in convicted criminals of conspiracy then, when there is no way they are going to convict their selves. If we go by that then we are lambs to slaughter without opinion. And whose opinion is the only valid one, yours? This is so ridiculous and absurd that I must question once again intent to conceal. Anything presenting opposing opinion to your own is not a reliable source. Quite evident to me what is going on here. Alphaquad 12:24, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- So you're both Doctors of Internal Medicine? Then I demand you discuss all adverse reactions with patients before deciding together course of treatment, including all remedies regardless of law, and should be easy for you since you seem to agree on the unethical nature of pharmaceutical companies and the government, respecting patient opinion regardless of your own, otherwise your actions become unethical. This seems a quite informative page. You owe it to everyone to know the reality of the situation, especially to that 30% who don't fully respond to poison. Also cases you claim as a success are certainly not monitored for any significant duration, only as long as you are signing the prescription pad. It would no doubt be enlightening to see where the majority of them end up. Scary thought indeed. But if you're here everyday editing wiki, then there must be few patients for you to kill or turn into Sulphur and Fluorine crazed zombies. Somewhat of a relief. Thank you for your time, it has been a pleasure discussing all this but truly sad for those who wont get correct information on the usually read pages for your effort or lack thereof. Alphaquad 14:19, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
- This is personal experience I relate. It is exactly that, "here's a prescription, now off you go...", and I will produce the records to prove it. The monitoring stops when the epileptic stops returning. In this case information finally got to them about real medicine and his or her seizures stopped immediately. You really must think ill of my knowledge, but may not be the case since I think you said you are not in America. This is America and 911 should be your first clue, we just don't care; well far too many of us, myself not included of course. Maybe things are done differently from where you write.
- Also I returned to add: As case after case demonstrates, money is god in America and government is at odds with reality over this false god. All companies involved with large sums of money should be the first source deemed unreliable, and the little guy like Dr. Mikuriya should be considered gold. Peace and health my brothers.
- Urgent note to Colin relating to my departing theme and comes from a real reporter: The demonizing of Iran has begun in the media, dont miss this article. Alphaquad 16:20, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
I do not think this part is explained well enough. Lay people reading this article will not understand the terminology used to explain the study. DanMcScience (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 04:04, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Should someone with epileptic seizures be alone?
Well, I was at work, and one of my customers told me she has epileptic siezures. She looks like she is older than me, I'm 22, so I'd guess she is 25-30, but I could be wrong. She lives on her own, apparently her 10 year old son moved out (most likley to his dad's or her parents or something). Anyways, I knew somewhat what this is about, I knew she could drop and shake violently without notice. But then I started to feel a bit concerned about her after I left. I was wondering if someone with this condition should be left alone... Because I did read off this wikipedia that if its less than 5 minutes no help is required, and if its longer than that 911 should be called. If this is the case, couldn't she go under for 30 minutes, smashing whatever body parts into anything around her at that time?
I don't have a login to this wikipedia, so if you could notify me of a response by emailing me at firstname.lastname@example.org that would be great!
There is a difference between having epilepsy, and having poorly, or uncontrolled epilepsy. And there are differences in the types of seizures people have. I have seizures daily, but I'm legally allowed to drive- I never have the type of seizure you are talking about without several hours warning. It would be ridiculous to have someone stay with me 24/7 because 3 hours might not be enough to call someone and let them know what will be happening. And I've only had a handful of tonic clonic seizures in my life time —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 16:31, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
Okay so, is it a seizure when someone is pretty much just waking up and when they do their whole body gets tingly (sorry for poor use of words, it's the only way I can explain it)as if the whole body has fallen asleep like a leg or arm falling asleep. they cant move their body at all, sometimes can't breathe but has prety much has full conciousness of what's going on... they'd have to really struggle to be able to get out of this type of "episode". So is that a seizure, and if not what could it be??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 05:29, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not a doctor, but just for fun I'll play one on television :-) It almost sounds like a hypnagogic spell. Except I dont' know about the "tingly" part. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 21:03, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
I am not a professional in the medical field and I found this article way too confusing to follow. For now I'll go elsewhere to gather information. However most Wikipedia articles I have had no trouble following-- even if I am not a subject matter expert for whatever topic the article is covering.
For someone who has the aptitude I think the whole page would benefit from a re-write.
- Seconded. For a reader who just wants to know what a seizure is, this is a hopeless article. These jargony medical articles really are the scourge of Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 23:00, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
- I think the entire reason people have a problem with this is they come to this page with the mistaken idea that seizures are just something that make you shake, and then they get angry when nothing says that (and of course it wouldn't because there are types of seizures out there that don't involve any convulsion at all. The entire explanation of what a seizure is lies in your brain and neuronal activity. Its not something that can be dumbed down because they're aren't laymans terms for these things. Ie you can't say "its when your brain cells do a happy dance which affects your behavior, thinking, movement, etc" Perhaps an opening that says there are differing types of seizures, and not all result in convulsions or tremors, with a note to scroll down would appease those who are looking for a simple explanation rather than an explanation of what a seizure actually is — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 19:46, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
What is a convulsion?
Convulsion redirects to this page. As you can see from the "what links here", there are many articles linking to convulsion, but in this article there is hardly any mention of the term "convulsion". As a medical layman I have no idea whether a convulsion is a synonym for an epileptic seizure, or a non-epileptic seizure, or something that looks like a seizure. Maybe someone with a better background could explain the term "convulsion" here or replace the redirect page by a short article. Han-Kwang (t) 14:08, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Convulsions are a type of seizure. They can occur in either epileptic or NES. Many people mistakenly think that a seizure means you will convulse. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 04:41, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
184.108.40.206 (talk) 05:13, 21 March 2012 (UTC)== Change over time? == Do the number and intensity change over time, with age, or is it fairly constant? Or, does it depend on the individual? I don't know, but it'd be good to include.220.127.116.11 (talk) 21:29, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
It falls under the classification of Photic Epilepsy (new terminology) in the classification as part of the Reflex Seizures (or Epilepsy). Reflex Seizures / Epilepsy is a wide horizon while not limited to: hot baths/showers/water, chewing or eating food, photic / light sensitivity, music (musicogenic seizures / epilepsy), triggered by specific "sound"; by this which can be a simple hertz (Hz) or frequency or a range (no correlation to musicogenic seizures / epilepsy; but Neuroscience is still currently studying in this area), brushing one's teeth, as well as other unusual, unique, yet, unexplained and/or unknown reasons nearly 90% of the time. Such cases do show up on EEG (electroencephalogram) or AEEG (ambulatory electroencephalogram) all the way up to in-hospital VEEG (video electroencephalogram) with the usage of a digital montage (computerized) recording.
In the case of one being Photic or Light Sensitivity, only a Neurologist. Epileptologist (A Neurologist who specializes in Epilepsy) or a Neurosurgeon who is well trained in this area to determine the issues for there are many common causes such as:
Cluster Headaches (common with men, "one-sided" headache)
Migraines (usually affects females more than men; can range from mild to moderate in severity level; usually sleep, darkness, and quiet will go away gradually. It may or may not include some degree of spots, flickering or flashing of lights which are but for a short brief moment.)
Classic Migraines (which one sees flickering to flashing of lights, tunnel vision, temporary blindness, very severe and requires immediate medical attention. A Neurologist is often summoned, if this becomes an reoccurring basis which testing will be ordered up as the Neurologist sees fit. Again, it affects females more than males, however, it is exceeding painful; vomiting, request for heat or cold compress on forehead, light sensitivity, sound sensitivity, are the most common; nevertheless there are others. It originates from the Occipital Lobe part of the brain.)
Pre-Menses - (for females; especially if one is overdue - also known as "being late" more than one week and/or on birth control pills. Of note; some females fails to notify Physicians of birth control pills they are currently taking, having been prescribed medication(s) to be treated for another medical issue; there could be drug-drug issues and/or reduction or increase of; the birth control pill itself. In some cases, some females do develop the symptoms described as above but is related to Epilepsy and falls under its own name; Catamenial Epilepsy or Catamenial Seizures.)
Hyperthyroidism and Hypothyroidism - (affects all ages; can fall into this classification and become misdiagnosed as some other type of medical condition if this medical condition had not been checked via a simple in-office or at the lab check; furthermore, especially with young children who do not have the ability of communication and limited range of scope other than "head hurts, light hurts eyes" for example.)
Meningitis - Information is thoroughly available in Wikipedia
Occipital Lobe Epilepsy also known as OLE - (affects all ages; can be overlooked and be categorized as Classic Migraines, however, it is possible for one to have both Occipital Lobe Epilepsy and/or have Migraines or Classic Migraines, it is very imperative that the Neurologist, Epileptologist, or Neurosurgeon does not "jump into conclusions" so quickly. Many females than males have been misdiagnosed as PNES or Non-Epileptic Seizures / Psychogenic Seizures and being told it was "all in their head". PNES does not stand for Pseudo Non-Epileptic Seizures, but rather Psychogenic Non-Epileptic Seizures. People with Occipital Lobe Seizures do not have Tonic Clonic also known as old terminology "Grand Mal" but they might appear as having an Absence also known in old terminology as "Petite Mal"; Simple Partial Seizures / Epilepsy and/or Complex Partial Seizures / Epilepsy can have a role in triggering an "OLE" or vice versa. It is possible for one to outgrow [further citation needed] if one was diagnosed as a child; like Rolandic Epilepsy, being benign, eventually goes away as the child grows up and matures; but not always the case. [further citation needed])
Medication(s) Induced - (affects parents, caretakers and adults) can also trigger a "misdiagnoses" of a medical condition, mainly due to failure of the patient's part of provisions of all medication, over the counter, and herbal supplements one may be taking. For there can develop a Drug-Drug reaction which has severe consequences. Usage of "recreational drugs" or also known as "street drugs" has severe consequences, especially when mixed with alcohol and denying such to Medical Personnel to Physicians out of fear of being caught. Drug screening or testing has now become a common practice in many Hospitals to Medical Practices; for the safety of the patient and liability factors. Deaths or serious consequences due to this declination of disclosure of usage of drugs and/or alcohol in addition to being prescribed medication(s) are even higher with the younger generation. Other two common issues are Medication Allergies and Medication Intolerance; the third being  which is uncommon, yet, not rare, generally revolves around those who have HIV, Auto-immune diseases, Mitochondria, Genetic, [more citation addendum needed here] is Medication Resistance.)
Food - (all ages; can be a result from food poisoning, food allergy, food dyes, peanuts, msg, alcoholic drinks, all types of sugar-free on the market which includes diet drinks to some diet food, non-FDA approved nutrition items (whether purchased online or via health stores, gyms, or work-out centers; examples of places where such items may be easily found; in some cases, may be even found at regular "all-in-one" major chain stores to grocery stores due to popularity. Just because it is popular does not mean FDA has approved of it; read the fine print. Many will indicate it meets the FDA's requirements or exceeds, but FDA did not approve of such said product on the market. FDA is working very hard and quickly to get this off the shelves, the more they get them removed, the more they populate.) to name a few. If you suspect food is a trigger, refrain from usage of that specific food, if it makes a difference, notify your Doctor. [citation needed here; report I have dated] This is a very dated report but of note, and can be deleted at any given time. Lactose Intolerance may or may not be a trigger, best suggestion is to discuss with your Physician and have tests run, he or she might refer you to a Specialist or Neurologist who may proceed with this area, I will decline to disclose the dated report other than the first 9 words I input on Lactose.
As you can see, the scope is wide and varied. For there is more information in scope and in depth which may be found at:
I think that the three following articles - epilepsy, seizures (which leads to epileptic seizures), and non-epileptic seizures, all need to be re-organized and re-done. First off, to have seizures redirect to epileptic seizures is incorrect, as not all seizures are epileptic. In addition to this, the definition then given to epileptic seizures is incorrect, as epileptic seizures only apply to those seizures which are recurrent. Additionally, non-epileptic seizures do involve rhythmic cortical discharge, contrary to the definition given. Any thoughts?
- I'll address your points in order. I agree that all three articles could be improved, but I haven't sat down and made the time to do so yet. I'm assuming that this article refers to epileptic seizures per the guidelines at WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Clearly it's arguable whether epileptic seizures are, in fact, the primary topic for Seizure, but I at least agree that it is the primary topic. As far as the definition goes, the cited source establishes that this is the consensus definition agreed to by the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) and the International Bureau for Epilepsy (IBE). The source goes on to give the consensus definition for epilepsy as "a disorder of the brain characterized by an enduring predisposition to generate epileptic seizures and by the neurobiologic, cognitive, psychological, and social consequences of this condition [which] requires the occurrence of at least one epileptic seizure." From this, we get that a person can have an epileptic seizure and yet not have epilepsy. If you disagree with this definition, please provide alternative reliable sources and we can change the definition or provide multiple definitions. As far as your last point, I haven't looked at that article recently but there's the same issue - we need a reliable source that provides a different and/or better definition. VernoWhitney (talk) 16:30, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
- Agree with VernoWhitney on all points. Someone can have an epileptic seizure without having epilepsy. The "recurrent" requirement only applies to a diagnosis of epilepsy (it is its definition). I've tweaked the lead sentence as it wasn't exactly quoting the ILAE definition. The key is that the activity is abnormally excessive or abnormally synchronous (some texts use the jargon hypersynchronous, but we should avoid jargon especially in the lead). Neither apply to non-epileptic seizures.
- I'd love to see these articles improved but also have found it hard to find the time. Colin°Talk 17:49, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
Suggested move to Epileptic seizure
There is presently a discussion at WP:WikiProject Medicine#Convulsion and seizure same thing about a possible rename of this article from 'Seizure' to 'Epileptic seizure' as well as merging 'Convulsion' into this article. Any views on these issues would be welcome there. --RexxS (talk) 11:51, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Suggested move of a disambiguation page to Seizure
Seizure currently redirects to Epileptic seizure (this article). There is a proposal to move Seizure (disambiguation) to Seizure instead. Comments may be left at Talk:Seizure (disambiguation)#Requested move. Station1 (talk) 21:49, 13 June 2010 (UTC) -- Result: Discussion now closed; page was not moved. Station1 (talk) 04:47, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- Adams, SM (2007 May 1). "Evaluation of a first seizure". American family physician. 75 (9): 1342–7. PMID 17508528. Unknown parameter
|author=suggested) (help); Check date values in:
|date=(help)Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:18, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
The term "fit" is deragatory
Though the word "fit" is used colloquially to refer to seizures (primarily in Britain?), it is considered derogatory. To most Americans using the word in the context of epileptic seizures would be confusing at the least and highly offensive to some, especially if describing one as "having a fit".
- The word "fit" has been used to describe a "a sudden violent attack of a disease (such as epilepsy) especially when marked by convulsions or unconsciousness" [Merriam-Webster] for hundreds of years. It also has other meanings such as a burst of activity or going into a rage. Lots of words have multiple meanings. The word "seizure" can also have ambiguous meanings, such as a heart attack, or also when someone gets enraged. Despite what the author of that WHO document thinks, it isn't "derogatory", though occasionaly folk read nonsense like that and think that the word has somehow become offensive. Medical texts will prefer "epileptic seizure" to avoid any ambiguity, though those texts dealing solely with epilepsy would use the word "seizure" without the need for clarification. Colin°Talk 08:59, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
- To some people it is derogatory, and as he said there are sources that call it that (Convulsion mentions this in one sentence and cites the WHO document the IP mentioned) or simply recommend against its use (as here, or here). Clearly "fit" has multiple meanings, and some of those meanings are why it could be construed as derogatory. For example, If I'm having a fit am I A) suffering an epileptic seizure or B) throwing a temper tantrum? VernoWhitney (talk) 17:09, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
- How about the very first one linked by the IP:
The term “fit” has a derogatory connotation and is also used by a lay person to describe people who are having a temper tantrum.
- To me that seems like a pretty clear explanation as to how 'fit' is derogatory in this context. VernoWhitney (talk) 17:29, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
- No, that quote doesn't say why or how "fit" could be derogatory. Just because someone says something doesn't make it so. For example, there was some nonsense going around a while back that "brainstorming" was offensive to people with epilepsy. A survey by the National Society for Epilepsy found that in fact the people with epilepsy generally found it offensive that folk though they were so easily offended. The word "fit" is similar. It seems some folk try so hard to not cause offence that they actually invent things for people to be offended about. The WHO article is an example of this. It is ridiculous. If a few folk do find it derogatory it is only because they've had this belief foisted upon them. The word "seizure" has exactly the same ambiguity as "fit" and can mean a temper rage. I've fixed the text at convulsion. We don't need Wikipedia helping this silly meme and destroying a perfectly reasonable, if imprecise, 600-year-old word. Colin°Talk 18:59, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
- I can see where your coming from that it may not clearly explain the why or how, although I disagree, but that's something that can be tabled for now without affecting the discussion much. You're right that just because someone says something doesn't make it so. That's why we use reliable sources. The WHO is in general a reliable source, and so I've undone your change to convulsion; I think we can keep this discussion here until there's a consensus and then the same language or lack thereof can be used in both articles. While the survey you cited does say that "many felt that this sort of political correctness singled out people with epilepsy as being easily offended", it does not mention 'fit' or imply any sort of similarity between it and 'brainstorming'. The IP and I have cited a variety of sources which both discourage its use and at least indicate that it can be considered derogatory. Do you have sources indicating that 'fit' (not 'brainstorming') is not derogatory or should not be avoided? VernoWhitney (talk) 20:00, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
- It is difficult to prove a negative. I'm sure Epilepsy Action had something on this at some point but ultimately it just comes down to opinion. There's no etymological reason for "fit" to be offensive. An opinion that "fit" is derogatory is just as much an opinion as one that X is the best football team or Y is a beautiful actress. I think it is a rare opinion, and one influenced by reading nonsense such as the WHO comments. Look up "nigger" in a dictionary and you'll see a word that is generally considered offensive and is well documented as such. I don't believe this is so for "fit", a word the angelic nurses at London's leading children's hospital are quite happy to use :-) Can I remind you that WP:V says "verifiability does not guarantee inclusion" and that I think per WP:WEIGHT it takes more than one WHO document to overturn 600 years of inoffensive use of the word to mean a seizure. Could you reconsider your revert at convulsion and to consider that other policies have a factor here, not just WP:V which only establishes a minimum threshold for inclusion to be allowed, not an incentive to include. Don't confuse style-guides and expert guidance on word-usage with whether a word is a nice or bad word. In precise writing, one needs precise words, and the ILAE and other wise people agonise over the precise definition of "epileptic seizure", and would prefer those words over something less precise. Colin°Talk 22:49, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Usage of "fit"
The following usages, by professionals and organisations, are all made without indicating the word is in any way a bad one.
- The phrase "Fits, faints and funny turns" is widely used by the medical profession to describe, in a nicely alliterative way, the various paroxysmal behaviours people get that require investigation for epilepsy, heart conditions, etc. Numerous academic articles use the phrase, such as this one.
- The Epilepsy Society say "a seizure (sometimes called a ‘fit’ or ‘attack’)".
- The Epilepsy Society say "The word for an epileptic event is 'seizure'. This most accurately describes the wide-ranging experiences of people with epilepsy. The words 'attack', 'fit' and 'turn' are still used, but decreasingly. The word 'fit', for example, implies a convulsive seizure but not all seizures will be convulsive"
- The NHS say "Tonic-clonic seizures are what most people think of as an epileptic fit".
- Epilepsy Action Use the word "fits" as a synonym for seizures, and their website and forums are full of that word usage.
- An Australian Health Website for kids is happy to use the word synonymously.
- The Indian Epilepsy Centre uses the word.
- In the UK, patients have a first seizure may be referred to a "First Fit Clinic".
- The term "Fifth day fits" is sometimes used to describe a syndrome of neonatal seizures.
- Countless dictionaries list the word as synonymous with an epileptic seizure (though not exclusively). They don't label the word as offensive or derogatory.
The word may be more common among British English speakers. Any word can be used carelessly and any word implying the person lost control has the possibility of causing upset. There's nothing inherrant in the word "fit" that is derogatory any more than "seizure" or "convulsion". Those three words are also used to describe someone who shakes with rage or temper. The word "fit" is just an informal word, like "tummy". Colin°Talk 09:26, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
- I have restored your edit to convulsion. After further research yesterday and today, it does seem that you are correct that the usage tends to be more common outside of American English, and that the number of reliable sources calling it's use derogatory are distinctly in the minority. Likewise, it appears that those merely recommending against its use are still in the minority, and so I have no issues with simply mentioning it as an alternative term for convulsions. Cheers. VernoWhitney (talk) 16:29, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
- The term "fit" or "having a fit" is derogatory. It was used as a way of describing a seizure or other similar event prior to that event being understood. The commonly accepted use of the term "fit" in this manner typically refers to an emotional outburst, or a violent reaction that can be controlled by a person. Epilepsy is involuntary. A person having a seizure does not "have a fit" or "throw a fit". When those terms were used it was because there weren't proper ways to explain what was happening and as knowledge of the situation has grown the term has become a slang for something very serious. Additionally, despite the amount of information we have learned about the condition, a vast majority of people are ignorant about the subject and it is in many cases a term that is used by such people, as they do not have an understanding of the condition and it's proper terms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rivensymphony (talk • contribs) 09:28, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
I have once again removed the unsourced comment about "fit" being derogatory. This is a false meme and not one WP should spread. The word is in fact widely used colloquially. It is imprecise of course. You need extremely strong WP:WEIGHT to suggest such a thing in the lead sentence of an International English encyclopaedia. Be very careful here. One can cause real harm by spreading these memes. A nurse using the word for a patient who's parent has just read this article might be reprimanded for using a derogatory word. Nonsense and rot. -- Colin°Talk 08:24, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
I propose "also known as an epileptic fit" be changed back to "colloquially known as an epileptic fit". This is not a meme. Americans find the term offensive because "fit" is not used to refer to seizures in the US but is often used to describe voluntary outbursts that have a negative connotation. To suggest the words are interchangeable to Americans is a little like suggesting to Brits the words "buttocks" and "fanny" are too. The edits have not matched the discussion in this matter, but there seems to be consensus that "fit" is at the very least colloquial.-Quizmaster chloe (talk) 23:25, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
The argument isn't what they are known as; it's whether the word "fit" should be put on equal footing as "seizure". If "fit" is indeed colloquial or informal this fact should be included in parentheses. As an example given above, "tummy" is in parentheses as a "less formal" on the Wikipedia Abdomen page without discussion of the term in the body of the article.Quizmaster chloe (talk) 19:34, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
Dog responding to seizures.
I read the actual on seizure response dogs and all the chat about it, i understand that some people may think it ridiculous. I take seizures myself and my dog has never been trained in helping me but she always knows when I'm about to have one, she not just watches over me but also my baby boy. She has always been like that even as a puppy and now she is old I'm not sure if she could ever be replaced and it's sad to think I won't be able to find another dog like her. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 04:30, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
This article is essentially poorly written but I am not qualified to edit it: it states that a bitten tongue may be "helpful" - perhaps a translation issue? This article needs a doctor specializing in seizure disorders to edit it. I did not find it to overuse medical jargon as much as having grammatical errors that almost seem to be a translation problem... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chefcat123 (talk • contribs) 18:53, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
Putting objects in sufferer's mouth / tongue-swallowing myth
There appears to be a common misconception that it is helpful to put objects in the mouth of someone suffering a seizure in order to help them avoid injury. I don't know how common it is, but I have heard the claim myself multiple times. I will put a brief mention in the management section, but it may be worth more attention.
Please see article: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/22/health/22real.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 07:32, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
I removed the chart "Disability-adjusted life year for epilepsy per 100,000 inhabitants in 2004" since it visualizes data on epilepsy not seizures and can be found in the article "epilepsy". We should discern seizure and epilepsy as far as possible. Classifications for both exist separately with a good reason. Jophiel 123 (talk) 12:23, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
I changed the sentence "Epileptic seizures (colloquially a fit) are brief episodes of abnormal excessive or synchronous neuronal activity in the brain" because it is incorrect. According to the full definition "An epileptic seizure is a transient occurrence of signs and/or symptoms due to abnormal excessive or synchronous neuronal activity in the brain" its the signs and symptoms that define the seizure and thus must be mentioned even though the sentence gets more complicated. Also I added the full definition of "epilepsy" (used a mix of 2005 and 2001 definition for convenience). The term "syndrome" should be avoided since there are also "epileptic syndromes" (its a disease or at least a disorder) Jophiel 123 (talk) 12:55, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
Is there any subject matter on the lifespans of people having chronic seizures, have been diagnosed with epilepsy, getting treated for seizure disorders, etc.? Nothing in this article really even hints on mortality rates. Is this page not complete? As far as I know seizures and the treatments for seizures result in shorter lifespans.--Dana60Cummins (talk) 23:40, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
"Tentative" is a pretty severe misrepresentation of the evidence. The mechanism of action of this treatment may be poorly understood and why it is effective in some patients and not others, but at this point trials have been thoroughly reviewed and I don't think anyone contends that it is always ineffective or that the portion of patients who do see a benefit from ketogenesis is insignificant. Civ77 (talk) 10:39, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
- Well lets look at the reference "The randomised controlled trials discussed in this review show promising results for the use of KDs in epilepsy. However, the limited number of studies, small sample sizes and a sole paediatric population resulted in a poor overall quality of evidence." Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:04, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
- Well lets look at the reference "The randomised controlled trials discussed in this review show promising results for the use of KDs in epilepsy. However, the limited number of studies, small sample sizes and a sole paediatric population resulted in a poor overall quality of evidence." Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:04, 29 April 2017 (UTC)