|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Are mast cells really granulocytes?
Mature mast cells are not circulating in the blood under normal healthy conditions (at least not in humans and mice). Therefore it is questionable if mast cells really can be classified as leukocytes (white blood cells). If mast cells are not leukocytes, it also means that they are not granulocytes but just cells with granules. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 18:46, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
Neutrophil Granule Clarification Needed
It is stated that Neutrophils release primary granules and specific granules, but in the following sentence the reference is made to secondary granules. Is the assumption to be made that the secondary granules are the specific granules? MycoGeiger (talk) 14:45, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
The explanation of what a "billion" means is unnecessary. Not only does the paragraph already define 5 billion (in scientific notation), but the use of billion as 1012 is archaic (no longer a British thing as this statement implies. Further, It is not common across Wikipedia to define "billion" every time it is used. This statement should be deleted.JustAnotherKinase (talk) 12:45, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
>>agreed MycoGeiger (talk) 14:46, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
picture of the eosinophil
Why is the "eosinophil" picture under granulocyte basophilic staining? The granules in the cytoplasm should appear a reddish tint as compared with the surrounding red blood cells.
-tried to remove eosinophil picture and exchange it for a better one, but the wikinazis undid my changes. also, i have not made enough edits so i cannot upload a different image. But this should definitely be fixed...
--also tried to call that first image a neutrophil (it's a poor stain, but the granules still didn't seem dark enough to call it a basophil). Moderators also undid that change. I wish they would at least research the subject for 30 seconds before undoing and calling changes "unproductive" or "non-contributory" or whatever. when wikipedia is incorrect (as it is here), it is unproductive and non-contributory to enhancing public knowledge. it's funny, i went to college for this stuff, yet my expert input is overturned by people that went to school for US History or Computer Science.
- The pictures representing the eosinophils, neutrophils, and basophils are of definite poor quality and in the case of eosinophil/neutrophil, the same image is used. Furthermore, the image should have a description what staining method was used (H&E, Wright-Giemsa, etc.) This is an obvious error that needs to be rectified.Arturkjakub (talk) 13:09, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
Cure for cancer
A cure for cancer, at least present this possibility...... Also it can run Crysis at 30 FPS J.K.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080627/cancer_trial_080627/20080628?hub=TopStories —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 06:13, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
- I don't see that this study "cure for cancer" is directly relevant to this page.JustAnotherKinase (talk) 12:39, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
three types of degranulation (full length article)--Eulemur2008 (talk) 21:58, 11 April 2009 (UTC)