|WikiProject Biography||(Rated Start-class)|
|WikiProject Medicine||(Rated B-class, Low-importance)|
Was he indeed knighted, if so when? 22.214.171.124 10:45, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
- It is very unlikely that Asher had a knighthood. It is not mentioned in his obituary in Br Med J., or anywhere else that I have seen in the course of adding all the citations and links to the article. I've therefore deleted "Sir" from his name. I've also taken the liberty of changing the status from stub to start, as the article is now so much richer in scope and sources. Would anyone like to peer-review it? Pointillist (talk) 16:44, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
- If there is any online source for the text of his other notable articles, it would be very useful to have it.
A photograph of Asher is needed. Something from 1947-1960 would be best - the low resolution picture in his obituary shows him after the period when he made he most enduring contributions and anyway there would be rights issues. Once this article has been assessed and finalised, it might make sense to show it to the Asher family and request that they publish a picture of him in WikiCommons. Image provided by Jane Asher uploaded to Commons - Pointillist (talk) 12:13, 4 June 2008 (UTC) *I would like to have a better reference to Asher on Cholesterol (e.g. detail of the reference by Dr Alick Dowling in http://www.bristolmedchi.co.uk/docs/Book%20Review%20by%20Dr%20Dowling.doc) as this is a topical issue.
I think the article asserts his notability and provides a pretty wide scope of his activities. It is entirely up to the family to release an image under the GFDL, but that gives them no control over the content. Some older papers may be available on PubMed Central.
The cholesterol quote is of course a complete anachronism. Asher died before the major cholesterol intervention trials were performed and demonstrated pretty much unequivocally that cholesterol plays a substantial role in coronary heart disease. If you personally disagree with this (and I don't know if you do or not), I would advise you not to use this article as a vehicle. JFW | T@lk 10:59, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
- JFW, many thanks for assessing it so promptly. Agreed that the cholesterol mention is inappropriate and I will delete it - I have no axe to grind on this article, just thought it was an interesting example of a contrarian position. Since the James&Ralph1988 source only cites his posthumous Talking Sense collection, it isn't clear when he took this position anyway. Pointillist (talk) 17:09, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
In the 1960s, when clofibrate was introduced, there were ample reasons to be concerned about the overemphasis on cholesterol, because relatively little was known about the mechanism and possible therapeutic effects of cholesterol lowering. Asher was not alone, so it was not quite as much a contrarian position to take then as it is now. JFW | T@lk 21:54, 23 March 2008 (UTC)