Talk:Malnutrition

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:Nutrition disorder)
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

"Food shortages are mostly caused by lack of technology"[edit]

This is not only unsupportable , its historically largely untrue. Further recent research suggests that modern technology has decreased nutritive value in a number of vegetables, partially due to petrochemical based nitrogen use and also due to hybridization. Shortages aren't even typically the issue in malnutrition, you can eat all the cardboard you like, it still isn't going to make you digest cellulose. I'd strike the whole section about unsupportable links between technology and productivity, or at least refer to last years USDA studies which compare low tech open pollinated yields to high tech ones. If I have time I'll add them myself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.181.140.151 (talk) 03:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Malthusian Theory Incorrectly Dismissed[edit]

The article's statement that "This Malthusian argument has long since been refuted" does not appear to be reflected in the Wikipedia article about Malthusian_catastrophe. Although that article does have a section for criticism of the theory, the main article on the theory does not at all support your statement from this article as quoted here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.46.43.230 (talk) 00:12, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

POV section[edit]

The section marked is POV in the last 3 paragraphs (especially the last 2) are POV ("These concepts should be taken with a grain of salt. The idea that producing all the food internally increases food security and that foreign trade increases food insecurity and malnutrition is against the facts."), without sources or footnotes, without wikilinks, uses strange language ("are keen to believe", lots of "e.g."s, "i.e."s and parantheses, which are not in a accordance with WP:MOS) and is speculative ("Part of that economic development would probably encourage local farmers..." and "Long-term foreign food aid, instead, may discourage local production and distort markets."). It also seems to present the solutions as simple, if only the author's POV were followed. Ufwuct 22:44, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I respect your ideas and beliefs (and agree with you no doubt); however, you do like to critize, so. Not meant as an offense, of course, simply an innocent observation. Anyways, good luck on your continued projects. Hiyoyou 06:40, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Ufwuct; this section may very well be 100% accurate, however it reads not like an objective encyclopedic entry, but like an OpEd piece. The various viewpoints should be presented neutrally and without bias. Jpmacd 09:18, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

More POV: "There is a range of opinions as to why [malnutrition] is so persistent. Organizations such as Food First raise the issue of food sovereignty and claim that every country on earth (with the possible minor exceptions of some city-states) has sufficient agricultural capacity to feed its own people, but that the 'free trade' economic order associated with such institutions as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank prevent this from happening." There are no sources for the IMF and WB preventing every country on earth from feeding their own people; and it explicitly says "opinions" in the first sentence. Any objections to the removal of this paragraph? Entbark (talk) 15:49, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

this seems related to the other issues presented here. in the "Food sovereignty" section, it seems that many of the previous issues have been resolved (at least in this one section), but this: "Neoliberals advocate for an increasing role of the free market." seems to be an opinion. i suggest either qualifying it ("some neoliberals"), or, better, to source this assertion.Colbey84 (talk) 05:05, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Statements removed[edit]

I've removed a couple of statistical statements totally unsupported by any references. Half the article could probably be deleted the way it stands, though it would be better to try to find references.

Hunger is the second most common cause of death in Africa. (isn't hunger a psychological state, not a cause of death?)
As of 2006 there are more overweight people than undernourished people in the world.

If people add further unreferenced material, please revert it and tell them to take a look at WP:Citing sources. Richard001 07:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

I love to eat so stop being racist agains fat people —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.82.39.2 (talk) 01:30, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Genetic engineering[edit]

While I'm here, some mention of G.E. might be useful, I understand scientists are working on plants with higher nutritional value, such as rice with higher levels of vitamin A to help malnourished populations. Richard001 09:04, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Confusion malnutrition / undernutrition[edit]

Hello,

It seems to me that the article is confusing "malnutrition" (ie inadequate diet, including deficiencies in VM, or obesity) and "undernutrition", which refers to the "world hunger" everybody talks about. I am currently improving the French articles on this topic, and I find it important to distinguish the two terms. About 850 million people are "undernourished" (or "are hungry") while malnutrition can affect several billion people (3.5b for iron deficiency, 2b iodine, etc.) and is worldwide (obesity found in developed countries).

I don't think I can really do much for these articles in English but I wanted to highlight the problem. Thanks, le Korrigan bla 09:17, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I completely agree with Korrigan, there is a big confusion here, I was searching for malnutrition and this article came up, but the title should be undernutrition. I was doing some research about malnutrition and even is it hard to believe many big countries suffer malnutrition by the called junk food; lack of trace minerals in many food; bad dietary habits; refined food as sugar, fluor; etc. Do not be confuse!

I agree. I am finding it awkward that, sporadically, there are references to obesity and over-nutrition in an inconsistent format. Though this issues are linked, I would like to propose separating the "Malnutrition" article into "Malnutrition (Over-nutrition)" and "Malnutrition (Under-nutrition)" into separate pages. Further discussions in the terms can be made within each article. I think the separation would make both concepts clearer and refocus sections that discuss intervention efforts much more consistent with the topic. Thoughts or comments? --Ryan.lap

You both stumbled upon the same thing that has been troubling me recently as I seek to improve this article for a class. I was also confused by the term malnutrition, since I have only heard it referring to the lack of nutrients: vitamins/dietary minerals. However, in my research I have come across other definitions. I believe malnutrition refers to both undernutrition and overnutrition, hence the discussions on obesity and overnutrition in the article. Please see the definition I found from UNICEF in my proposal at the bottom of the talk page. The structure of the current article is very confusing, and it would make sense to add sections discussing both overnutrition and undernutrition separately. Also, I'm not sure if the lengthy discussions on vitamin/dietary mineral deficiencies is relevant to malnutrition. I am deliberating on removing portions of the current article to make the information more accessible. I would love feedback and collaboration! Khatchell (talk) 22:54, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

@ Neutrality[edit]

The article itself has a tag saying that neutrality is disputed. Addressing this, I'd like to see more balance concerning the difference between the WHO measurement, which is output-oriented, and the FAO measurement, which is input-oriented. The problem is, however, that it is hard to distinguish between fact and opinion here. One thing that is definitely missing here, and was the reason I came in the first place, is the formula for the WHO-measurement. Wasting, stunting and z-score should definitively be 'spelled' out here. However, I do not have everything readily available here. :-( --Asdirk 16:06, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

World Caloric Output[edit]

I read the fact that the world produces enough calories to give everyone 2800 per day if there was a better system of distribution. (Or incentive to distribute it.)

I was asked to provide a source and came up with this one with Google which provides sources and additional information.

Calculating the world caloric output is probably impossible, but this information seems relevant to this article. I'm not sure where it should go, though. --Demonesque 21:07, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Actualy it is calculated each year and published in the FAO Food Balance Sheets. In 2007 it was 2,796 per capita per day. See: http://faostat.fao.org/site/368/DesktopDefault.aspx?PageID=368#ancor for the data. --Lbeaumont (talk) 17:54, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Measures to reduce malnutrition and neutrality[edit]

The article would benefit from expanding on the solutions beyond food aid, i.e. supplementation, public health measures, fortification, dietary diversification, and from compressing the inappropriate weight currently given to Spirulina Platensis. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bedrock (talkcontribs) 10:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Spirulina[edit]

The article overall lacks organization but there is a particular mention of Spirulina and IISAM who advocate its use. A mention of Spirulina's efficacy in combating malnutrition is really a topic for the Spirulina article and the famous people who advocate it belong on the IISAM article, not on the malnutrition article. A link both those pages in the links section is reasonable, but it shouldn't really be in the main body. --128.232.235.244 (talk) 02:08, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Recentism[edit]

Malnutrition has been a common experience for humankind since the begining and that should be put in context. --Kevlar (talkcontribs) 14:51, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Protein energy malnutrition remedies[edit]

Perhaps beans can be advocated as a suitable staple crop to prevent protein malnutrition? Can be given after diets as plumpynut (which also contain high amounts of kcalories) have worked and the digestion is again appropriate. Perhaps cheeses are another appropriate foodstuff, as they contain both high amounts of kcalories aswell as considerable protein levels (depending on type of cheese). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.245.185.158 (talk) 15:23, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

In addition, fraction 1 protein; which can be made by making a paste from tabacco leaves may be a suitable remedy. It was invented by Shuh Sheen of the Kentucky University see http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jf00061a023 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.245.181.143 (talk) 08:24, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

further reading section[edit]

for people that want to learn moreMatsuiny2004 (talk) 22:42, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

inter vs intra[edit]

inter-uterine growth restrictions ought to read: intra-uterine (within the uterus and not among uteri(?pl?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.171.165.92 (talk) 21:28, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Orange hair?[edit]

Why is there absolutely no mention of orange hair in this article? That was the only fact I really thought I knew about malnutrition, but even if it's not true, there's no section dispelling it. The word 'hair' is not present in the article. 71.236.97.142 (talk) 22:16, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

How is Malthus "refuted" by Sen et al?[edit]

Malthus advanced a generic, very plausible theory - that when you run out of land and yield increases, you get malnutrition. Malthus did NOT, for the record, say that the famine of the year so-and-so in India was caused specifically by land shortage or by overpopulation. So it's perfectly fine that Sen et al have concluded that a particular famine is not really "Malthusian" but maybe is due to unequality or lack of aid or whatever. Well, and let's say the famine in China during Great Leap Forward was not Malthusian either, it was mostly government-made. One way or the other, Malthus's theory still stands and can be used to explain other times and other situations, both in the present and in the future. E.g. the Great Famine of 1315–1317 in Europe due to many years of bad weather devastated the whole European region (which at the time was overpopulated given the contemporary technology), rich and poor alike. It wasn't like the evil rich people stole all the grain - there just wasn't much grain to go about, not enough. Cue Malthus... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.24.104.52 (talk) 04:05, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Numbers ?[edit]

How many people exactly are affected by malnutrition ? This is atleast higher than 1 in 6 see http://www.documentariesworldwide.com/?p=259 FAO stating starvation figures are 1 billion people

Overeating is also a form of malnutrition of which the richer part of the population is affected by. I'm guessing that 50%-25% could be exempt from malnutrition, giving a number of 75% ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.243.178.120 (talk) 07:54, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Questionable sources[edit]

Under Effects -> Mortality I read: "The World Health Organization estimates that one-third of the world is well-fed, one-third is under-fed and one-third is starving. [25]" The source was http://library.thinkquest.org/C002291/high/present/stats.htm.

I question this statement. The source is not WHO.

The statement seems to contradict other numbers in the article too. Just under one billon people are said to be undernourished. Starvation is an extreme form of malnutrition. So I don't see how more than two billion could be starving. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.16.193.254 (talk) 04:46, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Update: I found the original source at http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/diseases/malnutrition/en/. It does state that malnutrition affects on in three people but takes a very wide definition. If someone wants to add it back to the article, feel free, but it should definitely not say that one in three is starving. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.16.193.254 (talk) 07:56, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

hunger in united states[edit]

The usda just released a new report on hunger in the usa (on nov 16 2009) that changes some of the stats in the us hunger section. Specifically, the 1 in 6 children are at risk of hunger in the usa is now "nearly 1 in 4" (actually 22.5%, which is between 1 in 4 and 1 in 5). If no one edits sooner, I'll change over my holiday break, but I'm just too busy to edit the article today. source: http://www.strength.org/childhood_hunger/news/even_more_americans_going_hungry/ Also, another statistic that came out recently is that 1 in 2 us children experience living in a household with food stamps by age 20. Again, I'll editi n december if no one edits this into the article first. source: http://www.strength.org/childhood_hunger/news/food_stamps_help_stave_off_hunger_in_many_us_homes/

Incidentally, the topic of hunger in developed nations seems to have enough content to warrant an article all on its own. Unless someone argues otherwise, when I come back in december, I may pull this out into a separate article. — Eric Herboso 18:33, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Image at Epidemiology section[edit]

Image at Epidemiology section does not appears as it should. When I look for the "preview" (after I edit just this section, no the whole page) it appears correctly, but when I save image not appear properly. Could someone look about it what is wrong? --Jonson22 (talk) 12:29, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

What does 'Mutual of Obama' mean.[edit]

This sentence in the over-eating section at the end of the article (and those following) is/are nonsense: "An encouraging first step in this direction is Mutual of Omaha's decision to cover intensive dietary and lifestyle modification program of patients with heart disease, an initiative they hope will eliminate costly prescriptions and prevent surgeries months or years down the road."

Could someone who knows what is meant please correct.1812ahill (talk) 19:50, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


I have no idea what "Mutual of Obama" is, but Mutual of Omaha is a 101-year-old insurance company founded in 1909. Apparently, as part of their health insurance coverage, they decided that "intensive dietary and lifestyle modification program[s]" were cheaper than "costly prescriptions and ... surgeries". I fail to see anything in need of correction in the sentence you cited, provided that it accurately reflects Mutual of Omaha's health insurance practices. 99.129.137.108 (talk) 03:38, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

MDER[edit]

Can the article incorporate mention of MDER, the Minimum Dietary Energy Requirement? This seems to be the official definition for undernourishment by the UN FAO. Thanks --Lbeaumont (talk) 17:51, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Remove Malthus references altogether?[edit]

I am recommending that this article contain no reference to Malthus at all. Global hunger and resource shortages cannot be easily attributed to overpopulation for several reasons. First, with the unequal distribution of the world resources and the top 5% of the world's population holding the vast majority of the its wealth, it is hard to argue that it is too many people that is the cause of malnutrition. Secondly, with global trade making nearly any product available to any individual, accessibility seems to be a much larger factor when referring to the unavailability of food items. Third, new technologies which increase agricultural production have allowed more people to be sustained on much less arable land. Lastly, with the United States consuming over 3 times as much as most of the world's population Cite error: The opening <ref> tag is malformed or has a bad name (see the help page). , it would seem that overconsumption and unequal distribution of resources are putting the most pressure on the Earth's resources - not simply because there are too many people consuming them. Malnutrition is a micro-level problem and Malthus's macro-level perspective should not be applied here. --Ryan.lap (talk) 01:52, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Extensive Revision of the Current Malnutrition Article[edit]

Hi, I am an undergraduate pre-medical student at Rice University, and through my studies and experiences I have become passionate about health issues pertaining to unequal access to resources. I am excited to spend my time and energy revising this page in Wikipedia as part of a project for my “Poverty, Gender, and Development” class at Rice University. I initially chose to revise this article after reading the discussion on this talk page of the incorrect information regarding what malnutrition actually is. I agree with many contributors that the information in the article is unfocused and rambling at times, which detracts from the gravity of this issue. I have extensively researched this topic through my course, and I feel confident that the changes I make will greatly improve the current article. However, I would appreciate feedback on these proposed changes as well as extra critiques of the article as it now stands. Taking into account previously discussed critiques and my own critiques, I am proposing to make the following changes to this article:

1. After researching malnutrition, I arrived at a definition that I feel differs from the one presented in the article. Here is UNICEF's definition:

Malnutrition is a broad term commonly used as an alternative to undernutrition but technically it also refers to overnutrition. People are malnourished if their diet does not provide adequate calories and protein for growth and maintenance or they are unable to fully utilize the food they eat due to illness (undernutrition). They are also malnourished if they consume too many calories (overnutrition).

(http://www.unicef.org/progressforchildren/2006n4/malnutritiondefinition.html).

Based on this understanding, the current article has an incorrect definition and focus. It discusses deficiencies of nutrients (vitamins and minerals) in length. I propose to correct this faulty information and refocus the article on the actual definition. This will involve deleting certain parts of the article. I am also very concerned with the amount of information on different vitamins and minerals and the specific effects of deficiencies in this article. I feel that the article should focus more on the proposed definition, and less on these specifics. I would appreciate comments before any information I feel is irrelevant is removed.

2. Though the structure of the article has not been mentioned on the talk page, I feel that the scattered structure makes the article choppy. Many noteworthy topics such as famines are buried in long paragraphs. I seek to make many of these key topics more accessible by creating more, bettered named subsections. Also, details on how health and education can be affected by malnutrition are distributed throughout the article. I wish to consolidate such information into complete sections.

3. As my contribution is for a “Poverty, Gender, and Development” course, I will be adding a section on gender issues relating to malnutrition. I have researched the interplay between gender and malnutrition, and there is evidence that there are disparities within households around the world between the amounts of nutrients allocated to difference people. Men were historically given more food than women, because there were perceived to have heavier workloads (http://www.fao.org/sd/2001/PE0703a_en.htm). While this trend may be changing in many societies, I seek to probe deeper into how men and women are affected by malnutrition differently. Time allowing, I would also like to add a section on malnutrition in children, since this issue is especially poignant. Suggestions on which issues relating to gender, children, and malnutrition would be appreciated.

4. I also seek to bring up more social issues surrounding the causes and effects of malnutrition, and plan on adding the article to WP:Economics, WP:Human Rights, and WP:Sociology to encourage more collaboration between these groups on this issue. Food insecurity, which can lead to malnutrition in times of famine, can have social causes. Also, I would elaborate on the social effects of malnutrition, such as how it can impact a person’s ability to work or function in society. I may draw upon Amartya Sen (already cited in the article) and his Capabilities Approach when discussing the importance of alleviating malnutrition. I see access to adequate nutrition as a basic human right, and as such it is exceedingly important to protect this right for everyone.

All in all, I would like to streamline this article so that information is easily accessible to the public. Through my research I have sought well-founded arguments and credible research, but I am seeking feedback and input on the most crucial issues pertaining to malnutrition. Through this process, I seek to raise awareness of the causes and effects of malnutrition, and advocate thinking on possible solutions and policy changes that could diminish the extent of malnutrition. Thank you for your input! Khatchell (talk) 22:44, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

From continued research, I see that there are two distinct types of malnutrition: protein-energy malnutrition and micronutrient deficiency. http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/world%20hunger%20facts%202002.htm The current article does not mention micronutrient deficiency explicitly and states "protein-energy malnutrition" sporadically. I would like to add sections on each, which would help with the overall organization and clarity of the article. Khatchell (talk) 07:36, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
Agree that the first thing we need to do is define the term malnutrition based on the best available sources.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:37, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

One of the difficulties is here as well as in the literature undernurtition is frequently used synonymously with malnutrition when technically malnutrition is a group of conditions that simply includes malnutrition. This is a little complicated because it appears that in common usage malnutrition is used to mean undernutrition.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 09:19, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Review[edit]

Khatchell: Overall, great job! Your contributions and changes to the existing article definitely serve to improve it. It is well written and includes many good facts. Here are a few notes I made while reading it:

  • Classification section: I know you added background, but perhaps a little more would help. Who are Gomez and Waterlow? Why are they or their classification systems important? They were created a while ago. Are there any new classification systems?
  • First sentence of “Effects” section- perhaps the two clauses should be switched, so moderate malnutrition (the lesser of the two) is mentioned first.
  • Clinical signs of malnutrition- Great chart! Is the citation correctly placed? I could’t find the specific help page for this issue, but other articles have them placed differently. Ex: table in Income inequality in the United States
  • Impact on learning - first paragraph has no citation, and more citations are needed throughout
  • Impact on learning- is the information you use US-specific? Where are these programs being implemented?
  • Cancer- more citations needed
  • Dietary practice - more citations needed
  • “Small-scale studies showed that female undernutrition prevalence rates exceeded male undernutrition prevalence rates in South/Southeast Asia and Latin America and were lower in Sub-Saharan Africa.” - When was this?
  • Link to Progresa under children section
  • Young adults- this section definitely needs to eventually get more information. One question I had while reading it: is it necessary to distinguish between children and young adults or adults and young adults?

KiaraDouds (talk) 00:00, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Possible references[edit]

  1. A textbook from 2008 http://books.google.co.tz/books?id=wSTISCdSIosC&pg=PA127
  2. A good text from 2011 http://books.google.co.tz/books?id=pJHU1m7BEP8C&pg=PT46
  3. Lancet review Collins, S (2006 Dec 2). "Management of severe acute malnutrition in children.". Lancet. 368 (9551): 1992–2000. PMID 17141707.  Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help); Check date values in: |date= (help)
  4. Part 1 of 5 of a Lancet review series PMID 18207566, PMID 18206223, and PMID 18206226
  5. Another Fanzo, JC (2011 Jun). "A review of global progress toward the Millennium Development Goal 1 Hunger Target.". Food and nutrition bulletin. 32 (2): 144–58. PMID 22164975.  Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help); Check date values in: |date= (help)
  6. Ivers, LC (2011 Dec). "Food insecurity: special considerations for women.". The American journal of clinical nutrition. 94 (6): 1740S–1744S. PMID 22089447.  Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help); Check date values in: |date= (help)
  7. Musaiger, AO (2011 Sep). "The paradox of nutrition-related diseases in the Arab countries: the need for action.". International journal of environmental research and public health. 8 (9): 3637–71. PMID 22016708.  Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help); Check date values in: |date= (help)

--Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:20, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Additional information and feedback[edit]

I have almost completed my edits of this page, and I would love feedback on the changes that I have made so far. I'm particularly interested in feedback on the main sections that I added, under the "In special populations" section. I am still improving these sections, and any suggestions would be greatly appreciated!

I am having difficultly finding information on young adults and teenager, so I would love some help! Also, I feel that multiple sources should contribute to the information on signs of malnutrition. Is the medical terminology acceptable, or should general names for the conditions be used? Thanks!!Khatchell (talk) 02:24, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

I appreciate the improvements to this important article. I suggest that you discuss this at WP:MEDICINE since not that many may be watching this page. Acadēmica Orientālis (talk) 23:48, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback and contributions! I don't know how to add images, so that was very helpful. I would love to have an image of some of the signs of malnutrition, so I will post on the WP:MED talk page for help. I think I will work on the lead section a little, so that it is a better overview of the entire article. Let me know if you have any other advice! Khatchell (talk) 20:28, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Critique[edit]

  1. any links to the medical terms mentioned in the definition? those would be interesting to learn more about in context (ex. oedema, steatosis, etc.)
  2. Gomez and Waterlow are just kind of thrown in...maybe even a simple sentence introducing who they are/medical significance would make it transition a bit better
  3. a couple of grammar issues: second sentence of ‘Definition’ section is a run on; need space between Ziegler and parenthesis in ‘Mortality’ section; World Health Organization needs capitalization/link in ‘Dietary practices’; run on in ‘Future threats,’ starting with ‘With 95 percent...’
  4. citation needed in ‘Impact on Learning’ subsection, ‘Metabolic syndrome,’ ‘Dietary practices’
  5. ‘The state of obesity clearly contributes to insulin resistance’ in ‘Metabolic syndrome’ - source and/or more info?
  6. ‘Emergency measures’ and ‘Long-term measures sections a bit convoluted. Split the third paragraphs up a bit and perhaps eliminate some detail to avoid confusion.
  7. ’In young adults’ section - plan to expand?

Your article is super thorough and really well written. I didn’t find any major flaws at all, just these listed above. Ellyhutch (talk) 01:37, 10 April 2012 (UTC)


Peer Review[edit]

Overall, you have the work that you have contributed is strong and comprehensive. I particularly like the charts that include the nutrient deficiencies and the clinical signs of malnutrition. I would find those both to be very helpful in the future. I only have a few suggestions to help improve the flow of your article. First, the Gomez and Waterlow classification needs to be better integrated into the article. Perhaps describing how those classifications are used and it what context would make it easier to understand their significance. Currently, those classifications seems a bit out of place, and don’t necessarily contribute to the flow of the article. Secondly, there are several citations missing throughout the article. For example, both the “impact on learning” and “metabolic syndrome” sections need citations within the sections. Every sentence should be cited, and you can repeat citations when the same source is used. If you include [1] when citing your source, you can use [1] to repeat any necessary citations. Finally, the “in young adults” sections should be expanded, even if you only add a few sentences. Creating a new section with only one sentence looks out of place, and it would be interesting to see what other information can be provided. What you currently have in that section doesn’t really seem like the other forms of malnutrition you mention throughout the article. Other than these few issues I felt that you did a great job! Cctomball (talk) 13:14, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Further comments from an MSF doc[edit]

My main concern is with the section on classification. Acute malnutrition is usually classified as severe or moderate, based on a combination of criteria including weight for height, mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) and edema. This is pretty standard in every country where I’ve worked, and with all NGOs working in acute malnutrition. This method of classification wasn’t explicitly mentioned in the article.

Related to the above, and another possible omission, is the lack of any explanation of MUAC. MUAC is the standard used for screening for acute malnutrition in children under 5. It is also used in pregnant women. Most importantly, MUAC is the one single indicator of malnutrition with the strongest link to mortality. It is a far better predictor of mortality than weight for age, weight for height, or height for age. For this reason, MUAC is used as an independent entrance criteria to most TFPs (Therapeutic Feeding Programs – targeting severe acute malnutrition) and SFPs (Supplementary Feeding Programs – targeting moderately acutely malnourished children), regardless of the child’s actual weight (ie. W/H < 70% “or” MUAC < 115mm (not “and”)). In fact, MSF-France – the cowboys of the MSF world – now run feeding programs throughout Africa where they ONLY use MUAC and never take a child’s weight, to place emphasis on the fact that the main objective is reducing mortality rates, and everything else (including weight gain) is incidental. These so called “arm fattening programs” (as I call them) are very controversial, and certainly frowned upon by UNICEF, but they are more evidence-based than the conventional wisdom focused on weight/height (which doesn’t correlate with mortality nearly as well) and may in fact be the route that everyone eventually follows. I can send you the reference to a seminal article that compares the different indicators for malnutrition (weight, w/h, MUAC) to mortality. I don’t have it with me on my personal computer but if you send an email to my work account (chad-nutrit@oca.msf.org) I can get it off of my work computer.

Lastly, lately I’ve been dabbling with the idea of setting up a Supplementary Feeding Program in one of the districts where we work to target the moderately malnourished. In doing some background research I discovered that our good friends at Cochrane just recently released a Cochrane Review on Supplementary Feeding for Malnutrition, in June 2012. This of course is the bee’s knees of evidenced based medicine, if you wanted to strengthen any references in general.

Rich

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 07:45, 14 August 2012 (UTC)



Could someone check the link to Correlation fallacy and what it's doing on the page? Reading every other section on here gives the indication that malnutrition naturally would affect education and cognitive abilities, so it doesn't seem controversial. Also both statements have been flagged as citation needed. Reading the edit page has suggested that this article has had a few 'political' points added over the years (And removed/disputed) I think this could be one.

Also is there another more universal term than GPA that can be used? Not every English Speaker is familiar with the American Education System. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.41.123.101 (talk) 14:08, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

2014 gut bacteria study?[edit]

When Food Isn't Enough: Gut Bugs Affect Malnutrition, Too, Study Finds, NBC News, Maggie Fox, June 4, 2014.

Okay, NBC news is a reputable source. We do want to get the original study if possible. And even then, it's still preliminary. I mean, it's just one study, right? Not till we get review articles that something's well established.

Now, I think we can include this, as long as we identify 'a single study showed . . '

Personally, I have a lot of projects, including other aspects on Malnutrition. But if someone else has the time and the interest and wants to dive in, Please. We can use your help. Thanks. Cool Nerd (talk) 19:45, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

NBC news is not a reliable source for medical content. We do not allow popular press as it is so inaccurate when it comes to medicine. Please read WP:MEDRS. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 23:52, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

history of "new" (2002) reduced-osmolarity ORS for treating dehydration from diarrhea[edit]

http://rehydrate.org/ors/low-osmolarity-ors.htm

http://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/en/d/Js4950e/2.4.html

That the goal is to prevent or treat the dehydration from the diarrhea. And parents understandably want the diarrhea to stop. Cool Nerd (talk) 19:09, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
There is a PDF file, a little hard to get to, entitled Implementing the New Recommendations on the Clinical Management of Diarrhoea. WHO and UNICEF started recommending low-osmolarity ORS in 2003. Cool Nerd (talk) 01:14, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

http://www.who.int/maternal_child_adolescent/documents/fch_cah_06_1/en/

http://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/en/d/Js4950e/2.4.html

A few things[edit]

  1. We are not a how to manual and we do not give medication dosing information.
  2. Why did this article repeat the same thing over and over in two separate sections?
  3. What is with all the popular press source? This is a major area of study / documentation. The BBC is not needed
  4. There are issues with promotional language. We should be much more sedate in our tone than the aid organizations.

Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 22:13, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Change the name[edit]

Malnutrition is used for both to much nutrition and not enough. Too much nutrition is obesity and we have an article on that. 99% of this article is about "nutritional deficiencies" thus I propose we rename the article to that. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 23:30, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Undernutrition might be better yet? We already state that malnutrition is typical used to mean it here Malnutrition#Definition Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 23:40, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Okay as I read more:

Thus this article should move to undernutrition and nutrition disorder should be renamed malnutrition. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 22:42, 4 July 2014 (UTC) On further reading malnutrition is definitely the most common term and thus I think we should leave it here. Most of the time it use however it is used to mean undernutrition. I have written the first paragraph of the article to clarify these issues. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 22:20, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

A great ref from WHO regarding the management of severe malnutrition[edit]

[1] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 18:38, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Additional article(s)[edit]

"Childhood dual burden of under- and overnutrition in low- and middle-income countries: a critical review."

Authors:Tzioumis E, Adair LS.

Source:Food And Nutrition Bulletin [Food Nutr Bull] 2014 Jun; Vol. 35 (2), pp. 230-43

posted by Cool Nerd (talk) 17:44, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Proposed New Article[edit]

For a class assignment, I have decided to create a new article about malnutrition in Peru. There are several existing articles that fall under the “Malnutrition in xxx” category, including India and South Africa. I plan to examine the causes, effects, and management of malnutrition within the context of Peru. I will focus on food insecurity and the socioeconomic gap that contribute to malnutrition. Additionally, I will examine specific government initiatives such as the “Glass of Milk” program and nutrition education projects. I am posting to this parent article for suggestions on general layout or specific subsections that may be especially pertinent to malnutrition in Peru. Please let me know if you have any thoughts before I begin. I would appreciate the help. Thanks! Aqjiang (talk) 20:07, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

We just need to make sure that we are not just duplicating content that is already within this article. An article on malnutrition in Peru should really mostly just address epidemiology. Treatment is similar in all countries as are the signs and symptoms. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 20:12, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

infant formula, family budget, and malnutrition?[edit]

The following is from a book written by a physician about her experiences in medical school, including some time spent in India. At one part, a doctor said about a mom and dad with a sick young child:

"They keep repeating the name of the formula because they are so proud that it is an expensive brand, whereas in fact they are starving their child to death. And they have already lost one child, in the same exact way."
A Not Entirely Benign Procedure: Four Years as a Medical Student, Perri Klass, Putnam, 1987.
http://books.google.com/books?id=8FPhAAAAMAAJ&focus=searchwithinvolume&q=starving
Page 180 in the above, but page 200 in the paperback edition by Plume. Klass' book is generally a collection of essays, and this part is from her essay, "When Doctors and Patients Speak Different Languages."

We want additional sources and more authoritative sources, but this point does seem all too realistic. The parents can't really afford the infant formula and so they inevitably water it down too much. And to compound the situation, when a malnourished child gets diarrhea, the health consequences are often more severe.


Baby health crisis in Indonesia as formula companies push products, The Guardian, Zoe Williams in Jakarta, 15 Feb. 2013:
' . . . She started feeding Riska formula, rather than breastfeeding her, when her daughter was two months old; she was on contraceptives, and thought it was interfering with her milk supply. The midwife agreed, and gave her a free sample of formula milk. Now she spends 400,000 rupiah (about £26) a month on formula, which is half of her husband's monthly salary. She seemed to be a pretty good example of one of the main problems of formula feeding in Indonesia. Even the cheapest brands punch a huge hole in a poor family's budget, and they end up over-diluting it, which leaves the babies malnourished. . . '
' . . . Clean hands, clean utensils, clean bottles, clean anything, it's all a total pipe dream. A paediatrician in a separate Jakartan clinic, Dr Asti Praborini, said: "Selling formula is like the killing fields, in my opinion. The babies will die of diarrhoea and they will die of malnutrition." . . . '
' . . . Some mothers formula feed because they're not eating enough themselves, and don't feel confident that they're producing enough milk. A Save the Children report due out on Monday will give details of breastfeeding rates and child nutrition across the developing world. Wahdini Hakim, senior programme manager, says that persuading mothers to breastfeed is a more effective intervention than efforts to improve sanitation.. . . '
posted by Cool Nerd (talk) 16:40, 25 October 2014 (UTC) . Please jump in and help with some of the research if you can.
For what content is this for? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 03:17, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Nothing as of yet. But it is interesting and very straightforward. If the family can't really afford enough of the infant formula, of course the kiddo is likely to end up malnourished.
And even though The Guardian is a reputable news source, I definitely want additional sources. My plan is to review and excerpt this source and then look for other sources, especially in the medical literature. Cool Nerd (talk) 19:36, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

infant formula company Sari Husada (subsidiary of Danone) giving incentives to health-care workers in Indonesia, 2013?[edit]

Baby health crisis in Indonesia as formula companies push products, The Guardian, Zoe Williams in Jakarta, 15 Feb. 2013:
' . . . Sari Husada, a subsidiary of Danone, has sales reps that build relationships with midwives. . . '
' . . . Sometimes they'll get a gift, apparently for personal use, like a television or a laptop, but very often, it's something they need for their practice, such as an oxygen canister, a TENS machine or a nebuliser.
'The spokesperson for Danone insists that there is no connection between these events . . . '
' . . . Sari Husada has legitimate links all the way up the chain. Doctors running seminars for midwives are in its pay. It sponsors professional bodies, conferences and midwifery awards (which are then bestowed by the minister for women's empowerment and the protection of children). The sponsorship element sounds innocuous, and is allowed under Indonesian law; but you can forgive the midwives, who do the grunt work for the company and get the smallest rewards, for thinking that everyone else is doing it, so why shouldn't they? . . . '
' . . . It may sound counter-intuitive that Indonesia has the strictest breastfeeding law in the world – since 2010, all babies have had to be breastfed exclusively for six months, unless there were compelling medical grounds not to. Anyone hampering this could be fined 100m rupiah or spend a year in prison. But nobody has been jailed for misdemeanours and it is noticeable that only civil charges could be brought against the formula companies, while individuals could face criminal charges. . . '
' . . . breastfeeding activist group AIMI . . . '
' . . . One of the many problems that AIMI had with the study was that there was no transparency about who was funding it – but that bit was rectified when someone accidentally copied them in on the consignment form from FrieslandCampina, a Dutch formula company that is a big seller in Indonesia. . . '
posted by Cool Nerd (talk) 19:52, 28 October 2014 (UTC) . This is just a start. I want to excerpt and then summarize more of this article.
Interesting. Would be best on the breastfeeding or formula article IMO. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 03:54, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
I'm still in the process of going through the article a second time. Cool Nerd (talk) 17:24, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
This is not a suitable source. The popular press is not suitable for medical content on Wikipedia. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 21:48, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Doc James, I don't think the New Eng J Med, for example, is going to cover the businesses practices of Danone. And on that specific aspect, I think our best bet is a variety of mainstream sources. Cool Nerd (talk) 21:28, 31 October 2014 (UTC)


More information needed in the disease section about diseases from lack of sanitation that lead to malnutrition?[edit]

I would like to see more information added in the "disease" section of this article to explain which diseases come about about due to lack of sanitation and that then lead to malnutrition. In particular diarrhea, helminthiasis, tropical enteropathy (also called environmental enteropathy - for which there is no Wikipedia article yet?? I think we need one?). For too long, people have thought children in sub-Saharan Africa and South East Asis just need access to more food if they are malnourished. This may not be the whole answer though. They need access to more hygienic living conditions and they need to be free of intestinal worms... I am not an expoert on this but will try to do my bit, and I welcome any experts to add some information on that to this article. I am also going to make some improvements on the Wikipedia page on stunting, as it's closely related (have added some more hyperlinks to the Wikipedia page on stunting) EvM-Susana (talk) 21:39, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Creating a separate article for malnutrition in children?[edit]

While working on the section on malnutrition in children, it occurred to me that perhaps a separate article on malnutrition in children might be warranted? Thoughts? What do you think, [User:JMWt|JMWt]]? EvM-Susana (talk) 09:24, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Done Malnutrition in children Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:45, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Excellent. - I am thinking of swapping the order in this article: children first, then women then the elderly. I find malnutrition in children more important (and now it even has its own article) so I would like to swap it with malnutrition in women. Is that OK? EvM-Susana (talk) 22:37, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Sex versus gender[edit]

User:Flyer22 and User:WhatamIdoing Per this section [2] should it be sex or gender? I am never sure of the rule around this word. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:06, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

I am quite sure it needs to be "gender" not sex. At least in development cooperation we nearly always speak about gender - most of these things are society-based (=gender), not down to biology (= sex). EvM-Susana (talk) 21:35, 7 March 2015‎ (UTC)
Doc James, you've employed the sex and gender distinction well in the past. There was also a recent discussion about sex vs. gender among WP:Med members; see Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Medicine-related articles/Archive 8#People, women, and females. But regarding that section, "gender" is the way to go, since that section is talking about gender bias and similar. The section is not so much about biology as it is about societal rules or society's ways of life.
EvM-Susana, you forgot to sign your username above. I signed it for you. Flyer22 (talk) 22:03, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks User:Flyer Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:45, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Section on mortality to be moved to section on epidemiology?[edit]

The section on mortality seems to have overlap with the section on epidemiology as both of them speak of death rates. I wonder how this could be improved so that it's not doubling up the same information in two places of the article? Also am thinking of copying the information on mortality to the new page on malnutrition in children as it talks a lot about children. EvM-Susana (talk) 21:25, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

I usually put mortality in the section on epidemiology. Have moved Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:29, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Cognitive development section - suggest deletion of the part about the salt[edit]

This section here in the section cognitive development is not properly referenced, just leading to an article in the New York Times about salt. It should be deleted or at least given less weight or a better reference found. This is what it says currently:

Malnutrition in the form of iodine deficiency is "the most common preventable cause of mental impairment worldwide."[38] "Even moderate deficiency, especially in pregnant women and infants, lowers intelligence by 10 to 15 I.Q. points, shaving incalculable potential off a nation's development. The most visible and severe effects — disabling goiters, cretinism and dwarfism — affect a tiny minority, usually in mountain villages. But 16 percent of the world's people have at least mild goiter, a swollen thyroid gland in the neck."[38] EvM-Susana (talk) 21:35, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Malnutrition does cause a great deal of issues with mental development. I am sure finding better refs would be easy to replace the text currently there. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:40, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

Undernutrition, overnutrition[edit]

I have tried to make the part about undernutrition vs. overnutrition clearer in the lead. Really, this article should be called undernutrition because 99.5% of it deals with undernutrition, basically nothing on overnutrition. But on the other hand in most international documents, the term malnutrition is used to refer to undernutrition. So it really is a bit of a dilemma. Can we add a sentence saying "whilst malnutrition could also include overnutrition, it is rarely used in this context and therefore the majority of this Wikipedia article deals with undernutrition"? - another aspect which I tried to clarify in the lead is that undernutrition does not always only refer to "too little". It can also be a case where there is too much of one type of nutrient and not enough of the other type - which I think would be correctly termed malnourishment. So the proportions are also important not just "too much versus too little" (?). EvM-Susana (talk) 10:42, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

I just realised this has been discussed a few times already above on this talk page. EvM-Susana (talk) 10:48, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

We often name stuff after the most common term even if not 100% correct. I thought about moving it to undernutrition as well.
We have two sentences in the lead that state "Not enough nutrients is called undernutrition while too much is called overnutrition.[3] Malnutrition is often used specifically to refer to undernutrition where there is not enough calories, protein or micronutrients].[3][4]" and link to overnutrition which should be clear enough IMO.
I am still missing as statement along the lines of "malnutrition is often used to mean undernutrition, and the same is true for this article. Unless specifically mentioned otherwise, the term malnutrition refers to undernutrition for the remainder of this article" - or something like this to make it clearer that we also in this arictle use it to mean undernutrition in almost all the sentences. EvM-Susana (talk) 11:05, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
By the way, there are 136 people watching this page, why is nobody else taking part in the talk or is helping to improve the article? EvM-Susana (talk) 11:05, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Proportions, issue of zinc[edit]

Which refs supports the "proportions" being important bit in the absence of a lack of nutrition? The key is having good sources. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:21, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

I was trying to point out that "you can have enough input of calories but still suffer from undernutrition if e.g. there is not enough of a particular micronutrient." People might think "just give them more food" - but it has to be the right food. Zinc is actually a key issue. Zinc is mentioned in the article in the section on "management" but we should probably mention it earlier as on example of how a deficiency in one micronutrient can cause effects of undernutrition. I don't have a reference for this on my fingertips but it is probably easy to finde one, probably even in the main documents on malnutrition. - actually I now have added reference from UNICEF on this topic. EvM-Susana (talk) 11:05, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
We state "It may involve calories, protein, carbohydrates, vitamins or minerals" Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:35, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
yes but for a layperson this may not be sufficiently clear that it's not all of them together at once but just one of the five nutrients. I think it helps to provide specific examples, like the zinc example which I have now added and spelled out more clearly. EvM-Susana (talk) 22:37, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
We use the world "or" which indicates any of the one. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:18, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Yes, I know that strictly speaking the sentence is worded correctly, but I am putting myself in the shoes of an average Wikipedia reader and they can easily overlook that is says "or" and not "and" there, which is why in my opinion, it doesn't hurt to spell it out more explicitly, e.g. by providing an example. Anyway I will leave this point for now but might come back to it at a further round of revisions.EvM-Susana (talk) 08:28, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Rewrite of Intro Section[edit]

i came here just to get some basic info. i saw some basic editing that i could do, and did so. in scanning thru more of the article, i noted some more problems. in looking at the talk page, i saw a few things were brought up over and over. i tried to better address some of those with the rewrite. first, i thought there was simply too much info in the introduction; it should be an overview. it didn't end up much shorter, though, as i also added some things. i put the note about "malnutrition" meaning "undernutrition" for this article in the intro, because just in reading the intro only, i found it confusing (when i first came to the page). i did also leave it in the top section, though.

the thing that most made me stop to do an edit, was the figures on numbers of people in the world malnourished. (last paragraph of intro.) because it didn't also note that the world's population has increased a great deal in the 1990-2010 time frame, i found it misleading. i looked up some stats and added it. someone later edited my addition so that it reads much better now.

but...there are also misleading figures elsewhere in the article. specifically, under "Science and culture"--the first paragraph, while it may or may not be true, seems to be written to lead the reader to a conclusion of the author's. that too much money has gone to HIV/AIDS and not enough to malnutrition. i TRIED to come up with another comparison. i found figures for malaria (deaths in a year; money allocated in a year; people affected in a year). but i discovered i couldn't accurately "line my numbers up" to get a percentage to compare to the "less than $2 per child" and "$67 per person" because the source cited did not have the figures used available. in fact, that paragraph is copied directly from a media article, and the media article offered NO supporting evidence or sources. i think i saw on this talk page another comment about not using "media articles."

because that source seemed so bad, i started looking at some others and found others that...may or may not be correct. for example, under the "Children" section, the first 3 sources are...weird. the first one goes to a book that is not put out by WHO. so are we citing a source's source? the 2nd one, i found the stat, but putting the two figures together in one sentence--with 2 separate sources, neither of which references the other--is...confusing, to say the least. i mean, maybe both those sources cite the same source? and the 3rd one was for a sentence about child mortality due to malnutrition, but the source is about safe water supplies. maybe it's all okay, but after trying to find those stats and getting a magazine article, and then looking at other sources and having 3 in a row that seem "off," i'm left doubting the veracity of the entire article.Colbey84 (talk) 12:20, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

We should generally keep the lead to 4 paragraphs per WP:LEAD
While this is true "Malnutrition can occur in all animals—including birds, reptiles, and aquatic creatures—and even in plants." it does not really fit with what comes after. We could have a section on malnutrition in other organisms.
Not sure why the references were removed from this text "Malnutrition includes both under- and overnutrition. However, the term is commonly used to refer specifically to undernutrition. Following this common usage practice, “malnutrition” in this article refers to undernutrition and undernourishment as it relates to humans."
Agree it would be good to have comparisons to malaria.
Yes citing a source for a source is reasonable. WOuld be fine to update it with a newer reference.
The ordering of the content in the lead was written to follow the ordering of the content in the body which is written to follow the order in WP:MEDMOS
Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 13:31, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
Thank you for the comments/help. i don't know specifics of WP editing, so i appreciate being told when i do something incorrectly. (i have editing experience, but rules change.) there was so much information in this article, and someone (or several people) have obviously invested a lot of time to it. good editing does so much for good research and good writing that i thought this article was worth a time investment on my part.
the WP rule would explain why the paragraphs were originally so long. rule of thumb (in prior job) for online editing was to not let paragraphs get too long, or the text can appear daunting on the screen/it's simply easier to read shorter paragraphs. i was following that other rule, but if WP has guidelines, they should be followed.
jumping to your last point, as it's related. i reordered the lead simply because in what i read originally, there were sentences that seemed to go together, yet were scattered about. i tried to put related concepts/facts together. in doing so, i probably reordered the whole thing, and as it was getting very late, i didn't notice that it no longer matched the article's ordering. i agree that the ordering of the 2 should match. my error.
i'm not sure a section on malnutrition in other organisms should be included in this article. this article is quite detailed as it is, and malnutrition in other organisms (i think) would/could also be quite lengthy. i only put the sentence in because it IS possible, and in my first reading of the article, i was confused that it wasn't mentioned at all. perhaps another article should be written, and a link to it provided here? that might also be a more appropriate place for talking about the negative aspects of some of the strategies used/tried/proposed for management and prevention. this article had none of that information.
i hadn't meant to remove any references. by references, i think you mean links to other WP articles. oh, wait. i see. the sentences you quote are new. they weren't in the "original" that i worked from. the CONCEPTS were there, but scattered. i didn't use references in the new text, because the references were still in place elsewhere. i've noticed that WP either doesn't have a standard as to whether EVERY instance of a word/phrase that has another WP page should be delineated as such, (or whether just the first instance is enough), or the standard is not followed very often. i've seen it both ways in multiple pages. as an example, "micronutrient" occurs on this page both with and without a reference.
the malaria comparison would simply make the financial comparison clearer. it doesn't have to be malaria.
citing a source for a source...i understand the MEDRS standards. i simply wasn't sure that the 2 sources i noted qualified, even under those standards. neither seemed to be summaries of primary sources, or at least, not summaries related to the sentence in this article to which it was attached. and noting that a source for a source is okay doesn't address the issue of using "facts" from a media source when that media article apparently made no attempt to verify its own content.
since you simply reverted the entire lead to what was there before, i'm not sure why you bothered to write comments here. was i wrong in making edits? yes, they were extensive, because the text needed it, but the edits did not change what the article delivered. i erred in reordering the lead and not realizing it no longer matched the article. i wondered how it would work on WP, because normally with editing there is a "discussion," where the writer and i talk about proposed changes. of course, in those cases, there hasn't been publication yet, while at WP, there has been. i've not had a writer simply throw away the editing, though. here again, i'm confused, because following a few earlier edits, i got emails from WP ASKING me to edit pages. but...that happened awhile back, so maybe things have changed.Colbey84 (talk) 14:06, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Per other animals, yes another article would be good for that content which would then be linked from here.
By references I mean the stuff in <ref> tags. Yes we just tag the first time a term occurs and not the next times.
With respect to all the content that was removed from the lead
Extended content

People also often get infections and are frequently cold.[2] TOO VAGUE In young children, providing food (in addition to breastmilk) between six months and two years of age improves OUTCOMES.[3] OUTCOMES IS A VAGUE WORD AND, SORRY, BUT THE WHOLE SENTENCE IS RATHER A "DUH" COMMENT

This is often related to high food prices and poverty.[4][5] a number of infectious diseases such as: gastroenteritis, pneumonia, malaria, and measles, which increase nutrient requirements.[5] In the elderly, undernutrition becomes more common due to physical, psychological, and social factors.[6]

Efforts to improve nutrition are some of the most effective forms of development aid.[7] Simply feeding students at school is insufficient.[7] This often involves managing low blood sugar and body temperature, addressing dehydration, and gradual feeding.[3][8] Routine antibiotics are usually recommended due to the high risk of infection.[8] --THE USE OF "ROUTINE" SEEMS STRANGE-- Breastfeeding can reduce rates of malnutrition and death in children,

About a third of deaths in children are believed to be due to undernutrition, although the deaths are rarely labelled as such.[5] An additional 165 million children have stunted growth from the disease.[3]

Much of this is key public health information IMO. Breastfeeding is very important in the management of malnutrition. The Western world spend years trying to convince people both in the developed and developing world not to breastfeed. Hospitals still give out packages in the developed world that contain formula which is not recommended. Than the lead clearly overturning this wrong advertising is important. Especially as major health organizations and the medical literature is attempting to do so. That that continued breastfeeding between 6 months and 2 years is not a DUH comment. We had the uproar not to long ago about women breastfeeding in uniform. So yes people still have not gotten the importance. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 12:41, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Possible source[edit]

WhisperToMe (talk) 12:49, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Malnutrition. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:18, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Move section on special populations to earlier[edit]

I would like to move the section special populations to much earlier in the article as I think it fits better high above as it's related to causes and management. Would anyone have a problem with that?EvMsmile (talk) 14:57, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Malnutrition. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:01, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Malnutrition. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:21, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

  1. ^ a b text of the citation
  2. ^ Cite error: The named reference Young2012 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  3. ^ a b c Bhutta, ZA; Das, JK; Rizvi, A; Gaffey, MF; Walker, N; Horton, S; Webb, P; Lartey, A; Black, RE; Lancet Nutrition Interventions Review, Group; Maternal and Child Nutrition Study, Group (Aug 3, 2013). "Evidence-based interventions for improvement of maternal and child nutrition: what can be done and at what cost?". Lancet. 382 (9890): 452–77. PMID 23746776. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(13)60996-4. 
  4. ^ Cite error: The named reference FFL2010 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  5. ^ a b c "Maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health". WHO. Retrieved 4 July 2014. 
  6. ^ editors, Ronnie A. Rosenthal, Michael E. Zenilman, Mark R. Katlic, (2011). Principles and practice of geriatric surgery (2nd ed.). Berlin: Springer. p. 78. ISBN 9781441969996. 
  7. ^ a b Cite error: The named reference UK2012 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  8. ^ a b Guidelines for the inpatient treatment of severely malnourished children. Geneva: World Health Organization. 2003. ISBN 9241546093.  |first1= missing |last1= in Authors list (help)