Talk:Terry Wahls

This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past.

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

Biography: Science and Academia

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

Alternative Views Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative ViewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative ViewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative ViewsAlternative Views articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Skepticism Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Reliable medical sources[edit]

She does have a lot of WP:MEDRS research https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=wahls+t --Nbauman (talk) 22:26, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Wahls Protocol Diet[edit]

It is written that, "Wahls' promotion of her diet and lifestyle regimen as a cure for MS". As far as I know, that is a false portrayal. I've only ever seen her claim the reversal of symptoms, not a cure. In speaking of her own MS, she clearly states that she still has the condition even as it is in remission. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benjamindavidsteele (talk • contribs) 12:36, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

She does appear to claim it is curative. E.g., Ref 5, which describes her treatment as a cure. She is being interviewed so it is not likely she disagrees.Michaplot (talk) 19:52, 20 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

adjective 'curative' not supported by citation to web md (currently reference 6)[edit]

The section The Wahls Protocol Diet starts with the sentence

  The curative diet promoted by Wahls to treat MS is a modified paleo diet, relying primarily on grass-fed meat, fish, leafy vegetables, roots, nuts, and fruit and restricting dairy products, eggs, grains, legumes, nightshade (solanaceous) vegetables, starches and sugar.[6]

Reference 6 is to a Web MD article.

That Web MD article does not say that Wahls claimed that it was a 'cure'. In fact, it reports that she 'says it helped with her symptoms'. This is of course a much weaker statement. So i think the word 'curative' should be dropped, or given a citation from a 'reliable source' (in the wikipedia's view) that actually explicitly says she claims it is a 'cure'.

(I am aware of an earlier discussion of what i think is exactly this point, but i'm not sure what the old reference 5 is. However, an interview in which she does not disagree with something the interviewer says would not suffice to justify the word 'curative'. That would be a deduction from a primary source, if i understand the wikipedia methodology correctly. What is needed is a secondary source---something besides an interview---in which that secondary source itself draws the conclusion that she is promoting it as a cure. Such a thing might exist, but she seems to be careful in what she says even in popular talks, so i think it should be uncovered and cited to before using the word 'curative').

Son of eugene (talk) 05:32, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

regarding "no good evidence" for diet treatment of MS[edit]

Regarding the "no evidence" for diet interventions in MS, that's actually not an accurate portrayal of current research. The American Academy of Neurology (the top journal in neurology) has a 2018 study linking diet intervention with positive outcomes, at least in patient quality of life. Here is the study: https://n.neurology.org/content/90/1/e1.full Wahls protocol is not supported by research, but other diet interventions (i.e. healthy eating generally) are. Can we reword this to clarify?

I am fairly new to editing, just want to be sure the correct MS information is here, as I'm currently reviewing dozens of clinical studies on MS intervention, and diet is an important intervention. I am happy to bring in other studies also if that would help.

trumpeter832 (talk) 09:54, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Any source for WP:Biomedical information would need to be a WP:MEDRS; primary sources such as clinical studies are generally unreliable. The "no good evidence" is cited to a Cochrane systematic review, which is pretty much the gold standard. Alexbrn (talk) 15:38, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2023 review[edit]

This review was added on the article by Terry Wahls herself [1]. The problem with this review of trials was the low-quality of evidence. "Several dietary interventions may reduce MS-related fatigue and improve physical and mental QoL; however, because of the limitations of this NMA, which are driven by the low quality of the included trials, these findings must be confirmed in high-quality, randomized, controlled trials." This is low-quality. It isn't worth citing this until we have stronger clinical evidence. Psychologist Guy (talk) 12:55, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]