User talk:David notMD

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Hello, David notMD, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! --Insineratehymn(talkcontribs) 22:12, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

SAM article[edit]

You're doing a good job with that article, thank you. It's been on my watchlist for a while but I never got around to it! Tim Vickers (talk) 22:30, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Tim - Thanks for the complement, especially after I blew up the SAMe article due to my ignorance of editing skills. When I am not amateurishly meddling in Wikipedia articles I advise supplement and functional food companies on the science needed to support the health statements they wish to make.David notMD (talk) 03:00, 1 February 2008 (UTC)


{{helpme}} I have been rewriting the "red yeast rice" entry and adding many inline references. How do I get it re-evluated to lose the red question mark and criticism at the top of the entry?David notMD (talk) 15:16, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done I removed it. --Tyw7  (Talk • Contributions)   Changing the world one edit at a time! 15:21, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
David notMD, in the future, you can remove a maintenance tag at any time if you believe the issue has been addressed, as long as you explain why are you removing it either in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. There is no need for a formal evaluation. Please read Wikipedia:Tagging pages for problems for more details on this. --Mysdaao talk 15:28, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Herb Greene[edit]

If Herb Greene is associated with Maynard, MA, there must be some documentation of that association. The best place for this is in Greene's Wikipeida article. Remember, the citation should be from an independent, reputable source. Books, magazines, and newspaper articles are great sources for these references. Thanks! Wkharrisjr (talk) 16:51, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

I had coffee with him last week, does that count? He has lived in Maynard since 2000. I will see if I can find something that identifies him with Maynard that can be added to the Wikipedia entry. However, his own website identifies him in Maynard: (see end of the item).David notMD (talk) 20:51, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Primary sources are generally considered as not acceptable, but usually personal websites have been accepted for non-critical personal, so I would say a link to his website would be OK. Thanks! Wkharrisjr (talk) 21:20, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:36, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Conflict of interest in Wikipedia[edit]

Hi David notMD. Your comment here leads me to want to open a discussion with you about conflicts of interest in Wikipedia. Along with content about health and medicine, I spend a bunch of time here helping manage COI, which involves lots of one on one discussion, which I hope you will be open to. Please don't be offended - this is just kind of a routine inquiry. I'll start by giving you notice of our Conflict of Interest guideline and Terms of Use, and will have some comments and requests for you below.

Information icon Hello, David notMD. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, please:

  • avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your circle, your organization, its competitors, projects or products;
  • instead propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
  • when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
  • avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
  • exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you.

Comments and requests[edit]

Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review. Please note that there is no bar to being part of the Wikipedia community if you want to be involved in articles where you have a conflict of interest; there are just some things we ask you to do (and if you are paid, some things you need to do). I hope that all seems reasonable to you, and I am guessing that based on your experience as a medical/scientific writer, it will not be strange.

Disclosure is the most important, and first, step. While I am not asking you to disclose your identity (anonymity is strictly protecting by our WP:OUTING policy) would you please disclose if you are being paid to edit Wikipedia with regard to any of your work on dietary supplements? You can answer how ever you wish (giving personally identifying information or not), but if there is a connection, please disclose it. After you respond (and you can just reply below), perhaps we can talk a bit about editing Wikipedia, to give you some more orientation to how this place works. Please reply here - I am watching this page. Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 17:04, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Jytdog - I am not being paid, nor have ever been paid, nor expect to be paid, for any content I add to Wikipedia entries. I am, as I noted, a self-employed consultant to companies in the dietary supplement industry. Some of them do sell vitamins and supplements I have commented on. I have not informed any of them of my activities at Wikipedia, nor do I think any of them are aware of same. My intent in participating in Wikipedia has been to make entries factually correct and adequately referenced to high quality sources. My recent efforts (other than that stab at cinnamon) have been to standardize descriptions of Dietary Reference Intakes for various B vitamins. See for my background. David notMD (talk) 20:07, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your gracious reply. I hear you, that you are not paid to edit WP. Thanks for clarifying. I work a lot on articles about interventions - drugs and diagnostics, but also dietary supplements. There is so much frank bullshit out there, and it is so important that WP is not infected with dietary supplement industry marketing hype. I am sure you know what I mean - like the tidal wave of rank, fetid bullshit you get if you simply google HGH. I hope you are on the side of the angels when you edit. :) Jytdog (talk) 22:37, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
Jytdog - Just so you know, my reputation within the industry is "'Dr. No', as in No, you can't claim that." And my contracts stipulate that none of my clients are allowed to use my name as a marketing tool. Going forward, I will take extra care to cover both sides of a position if there is not a consensus - and stick to what it cited rather than my own opinion. David notMD (talk) 23:16, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Jytdog - A request. I was reviewing the entry on methylsulfonylmethane. The article content is not that bad, but the Talk section is old and large. I have never tried to Archive a Talk section. Would you please look at this and decide if a large part of it should be archived?David notMD (talk) 17:01, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

sure! Jytdog (talk) 17:17, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Jytdog - This weekend I am going to tackle an update on the purported health benefits of maca (Peruvian traditional medicinal plant) for women and men. I will be referencing only human trials. Probably do women first, as there is a good systemic review published in 2011. I would appreciate your looking at that once I've posted it, to see if it complies with Wikipedia guidelines on reliable medical sources. Thanks. David notMD (talk) 10:53, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

I take it you mean Lepidium meyenii? if so, i've watchlisted it. happy to look it over! Jytdog (talk) 15:43, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
My opinion is that you have over edited in order to reach a conclusion not warranted by the clinical trials. While Lee correctly pointed out that the clinical trials failed to assess safety, all four reached statistical significance for reduction of menopause symptoms. Brooks and the last Meissner at P<0.05 and the other two Meissner trials at P<0.001. I agree with Lee's conclusion that the strength of the evidence is limited, but that is not the same as efficacy not known. Stojanovska is primary research. But its value is that it came after Lee and reported no benefit for menopause symptoms.
We can discuss article content at the article if you like. Jytdog (talk) 04:20, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
I'll add, that the question at the end of the day is "Can we generalize from this?" and the review is very clear that the answer to that is "no". Jytdog (talk) 04:21, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open![edit]

Scale of justice 2.svg Hello, David notMD. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)