User talk:Jfdwolff/Archive 22

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


Attachment Therapy and Dynamic Developmental Psychotherapy[edit]

Help please! JFW, I don't know how to communicate with any of the medical people, so I am just taking you at random. Can you help me find out whether there is anyone in your group who would be willing to deal with a psychiatry/psychology topic where feelings are running high? There are actually two of these, Attachment Therapy, where some users are claiming that there is no such thing and have re-defined the topic to suit themselves in spite of evidence of child deaths and injuries, and Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy, where the crux of the matter is understanding of the criteria for a claim that a treatment is evidence-based. Even if you have no one interested in psychiatry, I know the issue of evidentiary bases must be familiar to everyone. Any help would be much appreciated.

Thank you. Jean Mercer 20:46, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Responding on your talkpage. JFW | T@lk 21:25, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. I left a message with the psychology group-- although they seem to be mainly undergraduates, which may not be much help. Dr. Becker-Weidman is not really an option, because the disagreement has to do with his research.

Your group doesn't seem to have a project about EBT-- may i suggest that it might be a useful addition? Best regards, Jean Mercer 13:59, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

EBT? External beam therapy? JFW | T@lk 20:59, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Attachment Therapy and Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy[edit]

I read your suggestion to Jean Mercer. I am a "psychologist" and in clinical practice; Ph.D., degree in Human Development from U of MD. Institute For Child Study. I am licensed in several states as a LICSW or related (Licensed Independent Clinical Social Worker). I believe I could help and comment on the issues in the above. Jean Mercer is a leader of an advocacy group called Advocates For Children in Therapy and seems to be trying to use those pages as soapboxes for her group. Her colleage Sarner (with whom she published a book and who is also a leader of the advocacy group) was "soft-banned from editing the Bowlby page for the same reasons. I would appreciate your help here. How can we stop from occuring on Attachment Therapy and Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy what her colleage did on Bowlby? Thanks Dr. Arthur Becker-Weidman 23:46, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Now Art, you know that's not really true. What's more, you are not a psychologist-- your licensure is as a clinical social worker.( I think you'll find that the NY ethics code thinks it's important to identify your professional competence accurately.) Your training as a social worker and in "human development" has not dealt with the nature of evidentiary bases, and that's one reason why we have a problem.
Ooops, sorry JFW-- I forgot I was on your page. You'd probably much prefer that this be discussed elsewhere.Jean Mercer 14:08, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

My understanding of Dr. Becker-Weidman's training is that with a doctorate in Human Development from an Institute for Child Study that there is extensive traiining the nature of evidentiary fact any doctorate in any of the mental health - psychology - social work - clniical fields would include that. However, if you have some proof to the contrary, please state that. SamDavidson 16:15, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Chaps, my talkpage is not the right forum for these discussions, as Jean has pointed out. I dispute that editors without qualifications should not be allowed to edit certain topics. The only criteria are the content criteria. That said, it's more useful to have insiders who are thorougly familiar with the published material on the subject. But in my mind a CSW should not be disqualified from editing a psychology article. JFW | T@lk 20:59, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Ahem. Parkinson's Disease, methodology[edit]

JF, a month or so back you dropped me a note to the effect that "Hi Dan, it's Jfdwolff. I'm the unfortunate admin who tried to mediate the chaos on Talk:Parkinson's disease. Your involvement would be appreciated, as the main point of contention is whether the "prognosis" paragraph is logically sound. And your marital arts skills may come in useful. Would you have an opportunity to work on the methodology pages? At the moment we lack some vital articles in the field, and even those that we have are poorly written. JFW | T@lk 20:07, 21 June 2006 (UTC)"

Does my work on Risk Factor Epidemiology that I've been posting on the PD talk page fit under that rubric? If so, how do you like it so far? If not, what did you have in mind? --Dan 18:17, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I stand behind that section and will support its inclusion. JFW | T@lk 20:59, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Dear JDWolf: please make your own judgements about whether i contributed in good faith, and good humor in the past. my personal life has been trashed by PD, and this kind of pettiness is just one more bridge too far (please see my note under discussion). I would like to be able to edit again; I am careful, contientious, honest, capable, and in a postion--homeless and on state papers, in large part because of the malice of my husband and the incompetence/inattention/inexperience/insensitivity of psychiatrists--where meaningful activity, even trivial, matters to me. thank you for your help, competence, and good will in the past. thanks209.56.60.2 18:09, 9 September 2006 (UTC) barbara davidson sept 9 06 1:08 pm

Personal attacks/acrimonious talkpage discussion/revert wars[edit]

Hi would be grateful for advice on how to correctly request help (I'm not asking for you to be admin involved - just guidance on how/where to submit). Been involved in revert dispute re Temporomandibular joint disorder over whether list of symptoms might be compacted by joing some items as a sentance rather than on own individual lines. User:Pat8722 revert-protected the list and, to my viewpoint, overly required sources from others and was negative about others ability to contribute (not just me - there is a previous/ongoing RfC on user already). Edit-summary-comment of a personal attack (or at least uncivil), and on responding further personal attack as to abilities as wikipedian & clinician. Following WP:PAIN instructions to 1st post a personal-attack warning template, resulted in complaint that I am vandalising their talk-page. All sorts of other pedantic complaints about my approach to editing article (eg in theis disorder are referred pains to upper back of such a different nature/anatomical poistion to lower backache, such that one can't join into one sentance as "upper or lower backache") or what I have previously said about my knowledge of field or how this is managed in UK. The belittling of my abilities to add content to this article is therefore a mixture of incivility/personal attack and content dispute. I posted to Wikipedia:Personal attack intervention noticeboard but the mixed nature of problem (attitude/behaviour and content) has resulted in a request to shorten my submission and raise content issues separately in WP:AN/I - should I do this, or would the whole issue be better transfered to WP:AN/I as the behaviour issues is both personal attacks and attitude in discussing content-protection. I think separting the two is difficult:

eg the revertion repeatedly removed my mention of referred pain to ear and whilst a citation-needed tag would have been best option if thought required, this hardly reflected on their depth of knowledge of disorder (i.e. they should have collabortated by helping to add content & cite sources rather than delete uncited "medical common knowledge") - I subsequently re-added info with refs of this symptom being present in upto 63% of TMJD patients. With User:Dozenist then substantially improving the symptoms section and grouping all the symptoms/sign into 3 subsections, User:Pat8722 then seems to taunt on the article talk-page that "Per Dozenist's deletions of your material below, I have not re-added the earache symptom, but I will not delete your material about earache, if you do re-add your sourced summary material which Dozenist deleted from that first section. pat8722 02:20, 24 July 2006 (UTC)" - which I fail to understand as User:Dozenist did not deleted the mention of otalgia nor the references I had provided for it but just placed in teh correct sub-section of symptoms.

So do I try to split personal abuse claim on WP:PAIN from a general non-colaborative approach content discussion on WP:AN/I, OR transfer whole issue across to just WP:AN/i, and if latter then how do I retract from WP:PAIN without (wrongly) seeming to be "working the system" and "fishing" for satisfactory admin response on different noticeboards ? David Ruben Talk 23:44, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I'd never heard of PAIN. I would have gone for ANI straight. But if there are two forms of anti-wiki approach, it demands two different actions. That said, perhaps the RFC should be awaited. JFW | T@lk 07:17, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Reverted Edits on Dermatology[edit]

Hi Jfdwolff -

Saw you reverted the addition of realself to the Dermatology section. I added it because there is little in this article addressing consumer information needs regarding dermatology services and products that are out there. RealSelf is commercial (so are many many sites linked to from wikipedia as resources). RealSelf contains user generated media (like wikipedia) - containing relevant information and testimonials from people going through dermatological experiences. I think this is a useful perspective to add to the purely one-sided medical information on this page. -Greg

Realself is a forum or blog, generally a poor candidate for linking. Please have a look at our external links policy. Alternatively, please provide proof that RealSelf represents a significant sociocultural trend, and it can be mentioned in the article body. JFW | T@lk 07:17, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Rav Schwab[edit]

I apologize in advance for what I am sure will appear to be vandalism. I have a Picture of Rav Schwab (your discussion post) and would like very much to send it to you. How would I go about doing that? (talk · contribs)

Vandalism? Never! I'd create a Wikipedia username and upload the question, making mention of the licence under which you choose to release the picture. You can also send me an email, but I suspect you'll need a login for that as well. JFW | T@lk 19:55, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I have the image file.

Gimme gimme gimme. JFW | T@lk 07:00, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I, myself, don't know how to post is could I Email it to you or something?

Re: Obesity[edit]

Apologies for leaving that sloppy reference to the 40% bariatric surgery complication rate. I started writing it but didn't have time to confirm the numbers, cite, etc. and had meant to delete it and return to it later. You were quite right to get rid of it.

It refers to a study which received a lot of press in the U.S. two days ago and I thought in the interest of timeliness and relevance wikipedia would do well to mention it. cite I've just put it back in with a citation and tightened up the section on bariatric surgery. Feel free to re-edit. The only controversial move was deleting the mortality rates for two procedures. You get such a wide range of numbers depending on the center, methodology, patient population, etc. that any reference to mortality rates should probably present a range and not imply that degree of certainty. That will take some research.

Do you have an academic reference? I'm happy with the way it's presented now. JFW | T@lk 07:00, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


HI! I just added my opinion on the Talk page. I won't edit it again, but I felt the need to explain the modification I did. Now, if you disagree even after reading it, I won't argue, I know there's thousand of people who know more about this subject than me! :) --Aristiana 02:38, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Commented on the talk page. JFW | T@lk 07:00, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Beit Hamikdash article[edit]

Hi Dr Wolff: Please read the attached request I received . Thank you. IZAK 07:51, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Need administrator help in Temple in Jerusalem

Hi Izak,

A user by the name of Biblical1 has completely rewritten the Temple in Jerusalem article multiple times, presenting some rather speculatve views of a few contemporary thinkers as objective fact and scholarly consensus. At this point, would it be possible for you or some other administrator to freeze the page and guide a discussion on the Talk page? Thanks, --Shirahadasha 04:46, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Hi Shirahadasha: Thanks for contacting me. I am not an admin, but I will bring your message to the attention of others who may be able to help you. It is also very ironic and sad that on the eve of Tisha B'Av that this needs to be dealt with. Sincerely, IZAK 07:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Template OMIM[edit]

You might want to read this: Template_talk:OMIM.--Steven Fruitsmaak | Talk 11:15, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Orthodox Judaism[edit]

Hello again Dr. Wolff : Thought you would be interested in the latest adventure that has started at Wikipedia:WikiProject Orthodox Judaism (perhaps you may want to join) and the discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Orthodox Judaism. Shabbat Shalom. IZAK 12:37, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Netziv and closing of Volozhin[edit]

-This echoes what I put on the discussion page for the Netziv.

The notion of "Rusification" as motivation for secular studies can be found in Rabbi Rakefet's lecture on the subject, here:

I think it's worth mentioning, given a.)Rabbi Rakefet's (and the scholars he quotes) eminence, and b.) it makes a lot of sense and answers some questions, such as why Volozhin and not Mir?

I understand your concern about what's the traditional understanding of things, and that this isn't the place for new research, but somehow I feel like Wikipedia can't be allowed to become the "Artscroll biography" account of everything when genuine yirei shamayim researchers suggest otherwise. But that's just my opinion.

Lastly, who put up the thing about closing due to internal turmoil? (Bochrim for R' Chaim Brisker vs. bochrim for R' Chaim Berlin.) I know that's found in the above Rakefet shiur as well. My suspicion, based on that lecture, is that any source that supports this theory also supports the Rusification one, but you're welcome to listen for yourself.

In any case, that's just me "hacking a chinec"; if you feel the above arguments are convincing enough, please un-revert; otherwise, I'm not going to fight it.

(But I've been tempted to write an article on Rebbetzin Rayna Basya -- believe me, it won't be the censored Artscroll version of her!) (talk · contribs)

Shame you don't seem to like Artscroll. If you have strong sources then of course you should reinsert the material I've removed for now. There are other accounts that cast doubt on the veracity of the "Artscroll" account; Yehuda Levi in his brilliant "Shaarei Talmud Torah" observes that there wasn't exactly a complete absence of secular learning in Volozhin, and offers his own analysis of the Netziv's decision. Still, I'm a bit skeptical of the fact that pinklich the theorists of Torah U'Madda invest so much time in "review" the Volozhin account. Revisionism from either side is undesirable.
Who was Rebbetzin Rayna Basya? Is there a "censored" version? JFW | T@lk 23:46, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Rakefet also observes in passing that they already had some secular studies.

I'd have to listen to the recording again, but my impression from Rakefet was that the Rusification thing was based on Israeli scholars he was quoting (whose names I don't recall off the top of my head); I thought it was implied that this also came from the recently-released Russian documents, but I could be mistaken. I might even write Rabbi Rakefet one of these days. Do you intend to listen to the recording, or is the burden of proof upon me?

Re: Artscroll biographies: there was a bochur who wrote to R' Hutner zt'l that he (the Bochur) wasn't as good of a person as R' Hutner thought him to be. R' Hutner replied that he was impressed by this fellow's attempt to grow, and that this bochur had a guilt complex because he was used to stories about all the gedolim having a direct, linear progression towards perfection, when in fact it is BECAUSE 'sheva yipol tzadik' THAT 'v'kam', something missing from most gedolim biographies.

I heard a young (i.e. too young to have known R' Hutner) Chaim Berlin-trained rabbi quoting THIS LETTER from the pulpit as the highlight of his drasha, and at this point mentioned as an aside, "of course, we have to have only positive material about our gedolim, biographies shouldn't be tell-all exposes." I was livid -- R' Hutner is saying these biographies are bad, and you're interpreting him as saying they're good? Please, just leave R' Hutner out of it then; don't twist his words 180 degrees!

Anyhow, Rayna Basya was the Netziv's first wife. (The name is still used by her descendants, including some people I know.) In "Mekor Baruch", the Torah Temimah (the Netziv's nephew) describes several episodes about her. Now Mekor Baruch is a very long and not-very-organized work; some of it's biography, some of it's dikduk, some lomdus, etc.; so biographies such as "My Uncle the Netziv" are excerpts of Mekor Baruch -- nobody would sit through a translation of the entire original. In any case, JJ Schachter [article's available online, should be easy to find on Google or] and others have articles about this: Mekor Baruch mentions that he'd see Rayna Basya sitting and learning all kinds of seforim, including mishna and ein yaakov -- in "My Uncle the Netziv", several of the more-contraversial-for-women seforim are omitted. (The original reads something like "sitting by the stove, with Tanach, Mishna, Ein Yaakov all around her", and the Artscroll reads "sitting by the stove with Tanach all around her"). There's also a quote where she says she can't stand the fact that any am haaretz can say a shelo asani isha, and that she has to answer amen -- woops, that doesn't make the Artscroll either. The best, IMHO, is when a very teenage Baruch Epstein says Rebbetzin, don't kvetch that you weren't given the mitzva to learn Torah, there's a Yerushalmi that says that women weren't given it because they were lazy! To which Rayna Basya immediately retorted, "oh, and you've finished the whole Bavli, that you're quoting me a Yerushalmi now?!" Then she pulled out an Avos D'Rabbi Nassan, which observes that the viewpoint that Torah is only for high-quality people, not lazy people, is that of Bais Shammai; we follow Bais Hillel, who's more forgiving. Okay. The Artscroll version? "Once, in an attempt to score a point in a debate with my aunt, I quoted her a Yerushalmi. She replied, 'oh, and you've finished the Bavli already to quote a Yerushalmi?' " -- that's it.

I never read it, but I was told from some very reliable sources that Feldheim also did an edition on the Netziv which was somewhat toned-down from the original, and Lakewood sent it out as a fundraiser. Then they realized it was still too strong, so they sent out a mailing saying, "Please, send us back your books, and we'll give you back your money!"

Okay, enough. Kinas Wikipedians tarbeh chachmah.

I'm affraid I lack the time to hear the whole lecture by Dr Rotkoff (or does he dislike being called that?) but I would highly appreciate if you could trace the relevant sources.
There is a lot of revisionism in the Haredi community. I don't deny this. Several Lithuanian gedolim were immensely "enlightened" in the sense that they saw the value of secular studies, and this may explain how Rav Hirsch found such warm support from Reb Yitzchok Elchonon Spektor. Rav Dessler is another, and Reb Yaakov Kaminetzki yet another. Artscroll is clearly under pressure from the "Torah-only" establishment to suppress these biographical truths. That doesn't mean that these biographies have no value.
It is true that many women had a lot of Talmudic knowledge. It is also true that especially in Poland many were illiterate in Hebrew and were drifting off to universities, assimilating rapidly into secular culture. Only the start of Beth Yaakov reversed that ghastly trend, which was about to finish off Polish Jewry before the Nazis had even set foot onto that land. JFW | T@lk 19:11, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

If you ring the rabbi formerly known as Arnold Rothkoff on the phone and ask for him by that name, he'll say, "That used to be my name, but now I'm Aaron Rakefet." (He first changed it from Rothkoff to Rakefet, then found that he couldn't cash checks written to Rothkokff anymore, and other similar problems, whereupon he had it changed to the current hyphenated Rakefet-Rothkoff.)
Anyhow, I'll see if I have time to get the exact sources from the lecture.
Just as far as the biographies go, we have two related issues: secular studies, and setbacks. For example, you can write a biography of Rav Dessler omitting R' Simcha Zissel Ziv's view that literature was important and that R' Dessler was raised with that education, and the biography will be incomplete but still valid. But then we have something like quitting smoking: they say the day R' Shach heard smoking was bad for you, he quit "cold turkey", and that was it. While powerful, it's hard to relate to a story like that. R' Dessler, on the other hand, writes that he had been through a mussar education his whole life, and then he found out smoking was harmful, and he was certain he'd quit immediately, and the next day he found himself smoking again. And he describes his struggles with this. If you leave out the struggle, people think oy, I'm struggling, what's wrong with me? Then the biography really loses a tremendous deal and can even fail in its goal to inspire and instruct people. Does that make sense? I realize I bundled two distinct issues in my anti-Artscroll bio rant there; my apologies.

I am certain that smoking took Rav Dessler away from us before his time. Yet, many people do manage to go "cold turkey" (including Rav Hirsch, but that was snuff) and that's fine. The Artscroll biography on Rav Dessler quite clearly states how he would smoke despite angina attacks; isn't that a struggle enough?

Artscroll has a completely different perspective on this. I reckon that certain things are suppressed because they would amount to leshon hora. I reckon that other things would amount to zilzul talmidei chachamim (which is possible even when the story is true). These things are rightly more important for a Jewish publisher than presenting every dry fact for the sake of historiography. JFW | T@lk 22:45, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Your vote and comment on the deletion review of evolutionary psychoanalysis[edit]

You wrote:

  • Delete or move to the title of the book and rework to become a page about Kriegman's book. One book does not a trend make. JFW | T@lk 06:55, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

To which I responded:

  • Comment - JFW, that's true. But what about the recognition demonstrated by its inclusion in the book Theories of Psychoanalysis and the innumerable references I have offered to provide from the major, peer reviewed, psychoanalytic journals of it being referred to as a specific theoretical viewpoint? My ego aside (OK, that's something not so easily done ;-), there is simply ample evidence that this viewpoint (which, in addition to the book, is presented in more than 50 published papers by myself and Malcolm Slavin in those major, peer reviewed psychoanalytic journals) has achieved recognition as a psychoanalytic perspective. Kriegman 16:20, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Does this make sense to you? Kriegman 16:20, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

It makes sense to a degree, but 50 papers is really not a lot, especially when only two theorists are actually contributing to the field. In my own field (medicine) this is generally insufficient to generate a trend, unless those two theorists happen to occupy the chairs of medicine in Harvard and Johns Hopkins. Declaration of bias: I am instantly skeptical towards anything prefaced with "evolutionary". JFW | T@lk 23:35, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Psychology Wiki[edit]

The Logo for the Psychology Wiki.

Hi Jfdwolff,

I noticed that you are a medical doctor (and a Wikipediholic!), and thought you might be interested in this project which I am involved in, The Psychology Wiki.

I won't say too much, as I'd like you to judge it for yourself, but you should find that it is different from Wikipedia, because approximately 90% of our contributors so far are professional psychologists, academics, or students and trainees.

Its hosted by a company called Wikia, which was founded by Jimmy Wales and Angela Beesley. There are Google Ads on the site, but we dont make money from the project, they're just to pay for the bandwidth, storage and technical support that Wikia give us.

Have a look and see what you think

Mostly Zen 00:35, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

The main page is b0rken today. JFW | T@lk 07:21, 30 July 2006 (UTC)


Thanks for writing JFW, I really do not know how to TALK on Wikipedia. I'm a college instructor in Clarksville, teaching Anatomy and Physiology for over six years, as well as pathophysiology, medical terminology, so I'm hooked on this stuff. I also teach US History. I will chech out some of your submissions, I'm sure I'll learn a lot. thanx joehall

History of science is very interesting too and may be something you will end up contributing a lot about. Have fun. JFW | T@lk 07:21, 30 July 2006 (UTC)


Rod of Asclepius2.svg
Thank you for your support of the Medical Collaboration of the Month.
The November 2017 collaboration is Transverse myelitis.
We welcome your help!

NCurse Nuvola apps edu science.png work 13:24, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Vitamin K[edit]

Could you check the talk pages for Vitamin K, regards warfarin? --Snori 19:31, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I've been blocked![edit]

If you have come here to complain that you cannot edit Wikipedia, please be advised that this is the work of an editor who goes by the nickname General Tojo, who has extensively abused Wikipedia. If you are a client, please help Wikipedia by complaining to your ISP about this particular user who is disrupting other people's online experience. JFW | T@lk 13:28, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

JFW is a blatant liar and entirely negative by nature. He blocks, bans and reverts everybody that he does not agree with, and then tries to blame them for it. Check his record. He contributes virtually nothing and keeps on preventing other people from contributing. he doesn't care if his malice affecst other people such as you, as he is so obsessed with trying to push his own views.

Uhh, who else - apart from you - has been blocked for disagreeing with me? As for "contributing nothing": a cursory glance at my userpage will reveal the numerous articles I have started (more than you, buddy). That is quite easy to verify. As for being obsessed with pushing views: pot, it's me, kettle; you're black. JFW | T@lk 15:35, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

You revert everyone. Look at the numerous reverts. In your case it's a daily obsession. You don't make contributions. You impose your ignorance on everyone. You know next to nothing about Parkinson's Disease. You shouldn't even be adding to it. Unfortunately you are one of the many deluded editors on Wikipedia that don't have a specialist knowledge in a subject yet still impose your ignornace on us whilst reverting anyone who really does know about the subject. I stick to what I really do know - which iswhy I don't add to many of the numerous subjects I have studied. Wikipedia has thrown everything at me yet it hasn't had any impact. I act at will. I will continue to retaliate against anyone who unreasonably reverts me or personally attacks me. Every time you do that you will find to your cost that everything you have ever added will be removed piece by piece by piece - sometimes very obviously so that you know it's going on, and sometimes very subtly so that you have no idea what has been done. You would be surprised if you carefully check from the beginning how much of it has been removed. I have had over 500 SP's, not the mere 200 or so that are known about. You and everyone else has missed so much of what I have done - or rather undone. You will soon get tired of opposing me. There are plenty of administrators that will already no longer go near me because of what I have done in retaliation.

You haven't substantiated your claim that I blocked anyone for disagreeing with me. I revert when I feel added material is not contributory, and am always happy to discuss, either on talk pages or by email (apart from the obvious vanispamcruftisement).

My knowledge of Parkinson's is not the issue anymore. You have badly mishandled your disagreement with Paul Wicks, and now you are trapped in your many vows of retalliation. Wikipedia has a long collective memory, and I doubt you will ever reach the stage where you can leave the grudges behind you and start contributing like others. Once in a blue moon a previous "user with issues" becomes a respected editor, but that is a rarity.

I know the articles I have worked on well enough to see your "retaliatory" damage, and I'm not playing that game. Your claim that you are subtly undoing my work is a bit grotesque. I am not tired of opposing you; I am outraged at your arrogance and your insistence on making other people miserable. I will of course not respond to specific edit summaries in which you have called me a neo-Nazi. JFW | T@lk 18:53, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

63% of your last "contributions" involve reverting or attempted blocking. None of them were discussed first. The facts prove you to be both intolerant and a hypocrite.

The difference is: I'm a respected contributor and most of my reverts are for reasons that are immediately obvious and non-controversial. You have made yourself a complete nuisance, and your reverts are retaliatory, based on personal issues and disruptive. I'm still waiting for the list of users I've blocked for disagreeing with me. JFW | T@lk 20:11, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't respect you. You only delude yourself that you are respected. That's what you want to think. You've made yourself a complete nuisance. 63% stands is beyond defence. You put yourself well beyond the readers. You'd rather satisfy your ego by blocking than enable the readers to have useful information. PD history is just one of many examples.

Ah, to be regarded as a nuisance by Tojo. You've made my day, chap. JFW | T@lk 20:57, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Wow he took the time to count up your contributions and use a calculator. I can see he's putting all three of those PhD's to good use. --PaulWicks 21:30, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Do not feed the trolls -- Chris 73 | Talk 07:33, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Interesting discussion[edit] Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(Medicine-related_articles)#Suggestion.--Steven Fruitsmaak | Talk 09:53, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I have a proposed revision to this at my Talk page. I would also love to get your read of Alzheimer's. I would like to see it be the featured article on Nov 2 2006-- the 100th anniversary of Alzheimer's first lecture on the disease. --Chrispounds 12:57, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Gulf war syndrome and genetics[edit]

What is your opinion of Schröder H, Heimers A, Frentzel-Beyme R, Schott A, Hoffman W (2003). "Chromosome Aberration Analysis in Peripheral Lymphocytes of Gulf War and Balkans War Veterans" (PDF). Radiation Protection Dosimetry. 103: 211–219.  ? There are slides here. LossIsNotMore 07:14, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Your permission assumed !!![edit]

Dear Doctor, I have assumed that I have permission to edit your user page and hence given a link for ICD 10. Please don't brand it as vandalism Doctor Bruno 16:25, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Orthomolecular medicine[edit]

I saw your username referenced on a quack's page ( link was spam-filtered) for this comment. Might I get your considerably more expert eyes to take a look at what's going on in Talk:Orthomolecular medicine? Many thanks. -- Cri du canard 04:49, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh God, has it started again? I trust Gleng's hand in this, but I am willing to comment on specific points. You've done will in identifying my comment on CLINMED - it sums up my experiences with the alternative med crowd. These guys could improve the standing of their community on Wikipedia by actually caring about NPOV. JFW | T@lk 11:46, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Cytokine release syndrome[edit]

Hi, I left two questions over at Talk:Cytokine release syndrome, maybe you could have a look? Cheers, AxelBoldt 05:25, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Warfarin and alcohol[edit]

Do you have any source for the information about alhocol and warfarin? It would be nice to add some reference to the Warfarin article. (E.g. What amount of alhocol is safe and what amount is unsafe?)

Best regards, Pierreback 21:50, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Hmm. There is surprisingly little good research on the subject - see this URL. PMID 463946 and PMID 7212888 downplay the interaction. But PMID 4894493 is used to support warnings for alcohol use in warfarin therapy (incidentally, the first author is called Kater, which means "hangover" in Dutch :-). JFW | T@lk 09:57, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Maimonides timeline[edit]

I noticed that you moved the timeline on the Maimonides article from the top of the page to the "Influence" section. Why? Would it not be better in the biography section? Ayinyud 16:33, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Because the "influence" section places him in historical context (Rishonim). It may even be better right at the bottom of the article. That is the normal place for such navigational devices. JFW | T@lk 18:27, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

In response to your comment on my talk page- I'd love to create a template- I just lack the time and know-how. If you have any advice, please let me know. Ayinyud 18:01, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Chronic Fatigue Links[edit]

Hi I was trying to add a link to my site for chronic fatigue, but you removed it twice. It is not spam, ive been sick for over 7 years and have tried many treatments, so i write about them and my results. People really like my site and email me about it all of the time. I think there is alot more articles and information there than some of the othe links like, A Hummingbirds Guide to ME. Ive written about 100 articcles in my blog and my message board has around 300 posts. I dont know much about wikipedia, so i dont know if this is the best way to conact you. Could you add my site please. thanks garrettgdubs12345 05:25, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Did you read the message at the top of the "external links" section? It states clearly that a new URL needs to be discussed on the talkpage, because there are literally thousands of pages of varying quality that could be included if we bothered.
In all honesty, the page is presently a complete mess anyway. It tries to satisfy everybody's viewpoint by simply listing every symptom that every CFS patient has ever experienced. That is not science and not helpful in the long run. If you've read a lot about the condition you may want to do some editorial work on the article itself. JFW | T@lk 18:15, 21 August 2006

Hi, i wasnt sure about that, could you put it on the talk page, i wasnt sure how to do that. I definately wasnt trying to spam, i could how see you need to guard a place like this against spam. But ive read a lot and done so many treatments, i think i could help edit and orgainze some things. And i wanted to make a message board for people to write about all the protocols and treatments, what works and what doesnt. Maybe save people some time and money.I try to blog every day if i can gdubs12345 05:25, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

It's simple. Leave a message on Talk:Chronic fatigue syndrome with an explanation of the nature of your site. On the whole, forums and blogs normally make moderately useful resources as they are very volatile, not officially reviewed etc. Our external links policy contains more details on what kind of links are generally regarded as useful. JFW | T@lk 23:05, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi, i did write and ask about the link on the talk page, no one seemed to have a problem with it.Why did you delete it again? Unless i wrote it in the wrong place. Could you add the link back please? thanks Here's a link to the place i wrote it. [1]talk page link gdubs12345 05:25, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

You put it at the top of the talkpage. People look at the bottom for newer messages, so I did actually overlook your message. I have now commented on your request - I still fail to see what your site adds to the many sites already listed.
Wouldn't you simply join in the actual editing of the CFS/ME article? From the perspective of Wikiepdia, that is many times more important than one external link to someone's private site. JFW | T@lk 20:55, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Acute fatty liver of pregnancy[edit]

Studying for my fellowship exam on call :) Hope all is well. Take care -- Samir धर्म 11:01, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

No reason you shouldn't pass with such comprehensive revision. JFW | T@lk 20:01, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

V. Craig Jordan help[edit]

Thanks for the pointer. I didn't pickup on the non-anitestrogen thing at all. I'll read the link and try and incorporate. --SiobhanHansa 11:59, 23 August 2006 (UTC)


I saw your post on the bobov talk page: could each rebba of bobov be limited to, say, 4 or 5 clips instead of 23 of them?

JJ211219 19:38, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I would support such an edit. JFW | T@lk 21:50, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Molecular and Cellular Biology Wikiproject Newsletter![edit]

We have a new newsletter!
As you've no doubt noticed, there's a new Molecular and Cellular Biology Wikiproject newsletter, which will be sent out about once a month to all WP:MCB members. This newsletter is designed to perform two equally important functions. Firstly (and obviously, perhaps) it will serve to inform the members of the MCB project of such things as important discussions, votes, and article improvement drives. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, the periodic correspondance will hopefully encourage a greater level of participation from the MCB community by acting as a gentle reminder of many of the the interesting tasks that are awaiting completion. If you prefer to receive this newsletter in the form of a link, or not receive it at all, you can add your name at Wikipedia:WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology/Newsletter/Opt Out List.
New project feature: MCB Article Improvement Drive
Have any pet MCB subjects that you think need attention? Have you been longing to be part of a team of like-minded editors working toward a common goal? If so, the MCB Article Improvement Drive is for you! On the first of every month a new article is selected by the MCB with the goal of promoting it to good article status. Make your nominations and cast your votes now, because the first article will be chosen on September 1!
In an effort to organize and motivate the MCB activities, it has recently been proposed that a member of the MCB project take the role of "director", who would be responsible for the administrative side of the MCB project, including but not limited to coordinating recruiting efforts, spamming the newsletter, and maintaining the Article Improvement Drive and MCB Portal. A special discussion/vote page has been created for this proposal, and the vote will run until 23:59, 10 September 2006 (UTC), unless the community decides otherwise.
Odds and ends: what else you got?
06:39, Sunday August 27, 2006 (UTC)
If you wish to opt out of having the newsletter posted on your talk page in the future, you may add yourself to the opt out list
Newsletter concept and layout blatantly "borrowed" from the Esperanza newsletter


Star of life2.svg
Thank you for your support of the Medicine Collaboration of the Week.
This week Hemolytic disease of the newborn was selected.
Hope you can help…

NCurse Nuvola apps edu science.png work 12:00, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Merge discussion[edit]

Seeing as how you were involved w/ the Speech pathology article, I thought you might be interested in the current merge discussion. Please join the discussion at Talk:Speech therapy.

-RJ1001 05:02, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Metformin and B12 deficiency[edit]

Could you maybe have a look at this [2]? I was about to add references to the relevant section of the metformin article, but I thought a heads-up was in order before I (perhaps erroneously) reverted your edit :) By the way, I could not access the link you provided in your edit summary. Thanks, Fvasconcellos 20:25, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

P.S.: I am not Just thought I should clarify that... Fvasconcellos 20:27, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
If any of the 2 papers in the Arch Intern Med is used as a source I have no problem with mentioning it. My search was only superficial. If this is reinserted it should be stated clearly it is a minor complication. JFW | T@lk 21:43, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
I've reinserted it. Thanks a lot for your input, and for answering promptly. Fvasconcellos 23:09, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


I am sorry that you feel that way about my addition of a clinical case in the external links section of the polycythemia article. I believe that clinical cases and images add a significant value since they provide a "true-to-life" description of a particular condition but, of course, they are not (and are not meant to be) the best level of evidence. is a project supported by physicians at the Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, and is not a blog.

I respect your opinion and appreciate your corrections since this is the only way to make Wikipedia better.

Clinical Cases 06:22, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you[edit]

I appreciate the encouraging words Jdfwolff. I also am honored you would consider my assistance in the WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology project. I have some personal issues demanding some time right now, but I will continue to assist. I think this Wiki project has huge potential and appeals to me on several levels. If I may consider for a time, then I'll write you when the dust settles. Thanks.GetAgrippa 22:52, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for Image:Slapped cheek.png[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Slapped cheek.png. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Angr 13:02, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Links on Headaches[edit]

÷Would you mind telling me why you consider adding external links to sites such as the American Council for Headache Education and the World headache alliance to be adding links "indiscriminatly?" Also, I'm not very familiar with the pecking order here? What is your position that you remove links that others add?

Thanks, Teri Robert writer, patient advocate

Teri 16:15, 1 September 2006 (UTC)msteri

Merge Proposal[edit]

A merger of Speech therapy, Speech-Language Pathology, Speech pathology, and Phoniatrics into one article has been proposed and a name suggested for the new page. I note that you have contributed to one page or the other in the last while. If you have any comments please make them on the talk page of Speech therapy. --Slp1 00:27, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your contributions and a question[edit]

Jfdwolff, I was just reading your talk page. Man I don’t envy your position, but I respect your gumption to logically address issues. It gets scary out in Wiki land at times, eh? Anyway, I thank you for your obvious effort. I really like the neutral point of view doctrine. It should be a mantra for all who contribute. Is there a mechanism to report vandalism if you suspect or see it, and how do you address the lack of NPOV in an article if it is suspected (this is just for future reference not a particular accusation)?GetAgrippa 02:34, 2 September 2006 (UTC) I found the place to address vandalisms!!GetAgrippa 19:37, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I need help changing article titles for cross referencing[edit]

I have been working on persistent truncus arteriosus and some other related topics, but I have a problem in cross referencing. Originally both were called Truncus arteriosus-the congential heart defect, and the other Truncus Arteriosus (embryology). I changes the congenital defect with move tab to PTA, but in other articles when I want to reference to Truncus embryology it sends me to PTA. How can I address this confusion, so I can cross reference chromosome 22q11.2, DiGeorge syndome, PTA, and embyological truncus arteriosus?? I also want to jump on the embryology band wagon and try a grandiose scheme I briefly mentioned on the discussion there, which I think would be fantastic.GetAgrippa 19:37, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Enzyme FA nomination.[edit]

Thank you for taking the time to check through this article, your comments and the suggestion about the Inhibitors section are appreciated. TimVickers 23:04, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

My pleasure. I think it looks great. JFW | T@lk 23:05, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

rm 'advertising' site/ details?[edit]

This edit, any more explanation on why the page is not authoritative? (I don't have the expertise to judge it) I'd appreciate it, I'm trying to counsel the new user who submitted it. Thanks, and sorry to interrupt your valuable work. Thanks for your huge mass of contributions in articles on the field of medicine, by the way. User:Pedant 21:33, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

OK, I appreciate your answer and you know more about it than I, but is it just that the site is not supported by a medical association? I don't mean to belabor this, is there anything other than that? I'm familiar with the policy, I am just wondering if there's anything actually wrong with it... meaning is it removed because there are better sources or, removed because it isn't a good source on its own merits? I'm not lobbying for inclusion mind you. Just, well, maybe a better edit summary might have been suitable? As in not biting the new editors? Or is there really something wrong with it... besides it being his own site, which I explained to him. You see I really am eager to get him up to speed with our customs etc, I'm sure you agree the more doctors and other professionals, the better, if they can follow the project guidelines. Thanks again for your help!! I really do appreciate the time you took to answer. User:Pedant 23:49, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification, and thanks for your patience. User:Pedant 17:41, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

thyroid info?[edit]

Do you know of any good sources on 'nonsurgical/no radiation' treatments for hyperthyroidism? User:Pedant 17:41, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Graves disease... family history of both hyper- and hypo-thyroidism. After an exposure to mercury, the hyperthyroidism reached a crisis stage, tachycardia and arhythmia resting pulse rate above 120, shortness of breath.
It's being treated with methimazole, but I've been able to reduce the tapazole dosage from 20mg/day to 5mg/two days by supplementing with 2 grams/day of acetyl l-carnitine, I had read that l-carnitine had been noted to be a "thyroid antagonist in iatrogenic hyperthyroidism".
The physician had never heard of it, but I was having very strong side effects from the methimazole ('strange sensations' manifested as "a feeling that the blood in my arms had gotten heavier" and "a feeling that something is about to happen") and really wanted something that would allow me to decrease the dosage.
I'm interested in any source for research on treating hyperthyroidism using nutritional supplements rather than methimazole, because of the side effects. (I'm allergic to tree nuts and products containing ephedrine as well). I'm really not looking for a free online consultation, just wondered if you might know of any materials that might be worth reading on the subject. User:Pedant 21:56, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes, the exposure was during the removal of 2 broken teeth which had mercury-amalgam fillings. The heavy hyperthyroid symptoms happened within a week. I'm not certain that the methimazole side effects are strictly form the drug, they may be partly from the mercury. The literature on methimazole does include 'strange sensations' as a documented side-effect, but does not explain the term.
This is where I got the info on l-carnitine. I had my doctor access it and he said I could try it if I wanted, it worked pretty well, now I'm taking 1/8th of the amount of tapazole, and have been stable at the dose of 5mg/2 days plus 2 grams l-carnitine/day for over 1 year:
The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism Vol. 86, No. 8 3579-3594 Copyright © 2001 by The Endocrine Society
Endocrine Care
Usefulness of L-Carnitine, A Naturally Occurring Peripheral Antagonist of Thyroid Hormone Action, ::in Iatrogenic Hyperthyroidism: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial
Salvatore Benvenga, Rosaria M. Ruggeri, Antonia Russo, Daniela Lapa, Alfredo Campenni and Francesco ::Trimarchi
Cattedra & Sezione di Endocrinologia, Dipartimento Clinico-sperimentale di Medicina e Farmacologia, ::University of Messina School of Medicine, 98125 Messina, Italy

Yep, no mention of mercury. "After an exposure to mercury, the hyperthyroidism reached a crisis stage", I never intended to imply that mercury caused the thyroid crisis, just that it occured shortly thereafter. The carnitine has helped quite a bit, as another reaction to the Methimazole seemed to be that I put on a lot of weight, which is under control now. I don't know of any other study on carnitine as a treatment for Graves' disesase, either. I did read the study though, and am well aware of what iatrogenic means, it seemed it might be useful, and the Tapazole was driving me nuts, so I wanted to try it. It worked apparently. I would like to find some other dietary treatment that might allow me to eliminate the Tapazole altogether. Thanks... and thanks for answering that other question about the link in that article. I think the User understands why it's not considered suitable. User:Pedant 20:49, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

(sorry about the bold para... was meant to be one word) User:Pedant 20:59, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Revert on MI page[edit]

Don't understand the purpose of the recent revert of my posting on the comparative toxicity and cost of aspirin relative to clopidogrel. Seems to me that it is quite relevant to the section and gives real numbers to reinforce that aspirin is the first line treatment. The average physician or med student will miss it if it gets put over on aspirin, which everybody knows about already. And yes, I know about stroke. In fact, I have some patent claims in the area. BTW, I'm an MD, PhD pharmacologist toxicologist. Don't want to get into an edit war--Just wondering.Pproctor 00:41, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Responding on your talkpage. JFW | T@lk 06:55, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Agree, the article is getting a little long. Accordingly, I posted the quotation and link to the AJM review article on Antiplatelet drugs and changed the link in the appropriate section on MI from reading "Antiplatelet" to reading "Antiplatelet drug". This makes it a little clearer where the link goes.
Particulars: I'm in Houston Texas. Been posting here on and off anonymously practically since Nupedia. Only recently have registered, which may have been a mistake. Pproctor 14:44, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Discoverer of parathyroid glands[edit]

I found a swedish medical student, Ivar Sandstrom, discovered the parathyroid glands in 1880.GetAgrippa 13:43, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Really? My endocrine surgery professor in med school claimed it was in a London Zoo rhino. Anycause, there's nothing that a WP:CITE can't solve :-)> JFW | T@lk 16:33, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

In the words of Pharaoh: "Let it be written, let it be done." I added the mention and reference as it was the last major organ to be discovered in the human. Glad I was able to solve the mystery. I guess the student may have had experience in a zoo before medical school, so that part of the story may be credible. I have heard of stranger tales.GetAgrippa 19:10, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

article extraction?[edit]

hi there,

i started a stub on menstrual extraction, and am trying to improve it. there is an article buried in this site: [3] called "The Whats Whys and Hows of Menstrual Extraction." i liked that article because it has historical value/gritty authenticity (and includes pros/cons). do you know if there is a way to include it somehow by itself/without the sisterzeus site? (i'm not crazy about sisterzeus site, and it's self-published). any help appreciated. thanks, Cindery 17:29, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

It's been several years since I did obstetrics, and my unit was never involved in any form of abortion. Hence, I'm affraid I lack enough expertise. That said, I'm happy to comment on specific issues if you're stuck (I may be able to interpret some medicalese from journal articles). JFW | T@lk 20:40, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

hi, thanks. and thanks for bolding title. i'm afraid i had a really dumb technical question, though--how to cite the "Whats Whys Hows" article without linking from sisterzeus? Whats/Whys/Hows is a pdf located on sisterzeus site. (i don't like the sisterzeus site because it is 1)kinda lame 2)self-published.) is there a way to cite the pdf without linking to the site? please don't trouble yourself over it if you don't have time. all best, Cindery 21:25, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

You'll need the deeplinked URL of the article, then link it like any other external link. The Wiki will figure out that it's a PDF and put a nice Acrobat logo next to it! JFW | T@lk 21:33, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

This month's WP:MCB Article Improvement Drive article[edit]

ClockworkSoul 22:52, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Jewish WIKIVERSITY[edit]

Hello Dr. Wolff: NEW: On Wikiversity there is now a "Jewish Studies School." Will it become a "duplication" of many things on Wikipedia? What should it's goals and functions be? Please add your learned views. Thank you. IZAK 09:18, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I fear it will only become a source of contention. The various branches are likely to disagree on how particular issues are presented. Even if we call it "Orthodox Judaism" there will be testing cases on how wide a definition of "Orthodox" we shall be sticking to. JFW | T@lk 13:02, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Reply to you[edit]


I've replied to your note on my talk page.

Thanks, TeriRobert 15:55, 6 September 2006 (UTC)Msteri



The main page of WikiProject Medicine has been redesigned. Comments are welcome, and please consider listing yourself as a participant.

--Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 23:19, 6 September 2006 (UTC)


While it is true that Google does not return any good results, I do have a textual reference which I have added. I have done extensive research on this subject as well over my lifetime (note my screen name). I have also heard porphyria called porphyric hemophilia long before the game's reference. It may be an obscure reference (Hey, the word "obscure" is even in the title!), but perhaps enough to warrant a disambig. ~ Porphyric Hemophiliac § 00:25, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I wonder what the etymology is, because hemophilia is a completely unrelated condition. I have turned the redirect into a disambig. JFW | T@lk 06:55, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/Jew Year's Eve[edit]

Hi Dr. Wolff: Take a look at this please: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jew Year's Eve. Be well. IZAK 17:19, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


Hi. When you have a minute, would you please look at the discussion page for Headache?


--TeriRobert 18:47, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Anti CD3 monoclonal antibodies[edit]

Hey JFW. Anti-CD3 monoclonals are such a hot topic these days: T1DM, GVHD, T-cell lymphomas, someone even suggested them for Crohn's at World Congress of GI last year! I'm not sure if any work has been published on them in celiac even as putative therapies? Feel free to include it if you like based on expert opinion in the Gut review. Do you recall what the primary ref that they cited was (I'd be interested in reading it)? My guess is anti-TNF therapy will be the next vanguard in celiac dz(even in non-refractory celiac -- large North Am trial is underway, forgot the acronym). Take care -- Samir धर्म 09:30, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Diabetes intro-length[edit]

Hi. I was wondering why you removed the {{intro length}} tag that I put on the Diabetes mellitus article. The introduction to this article is, IMHO, far too long. The vast majority of good articles on WP are briefly summarized in the lead-in, and then you get a table of contents. This, I feel, is important, hence my addition of the tag. Please read WP:LEAD, and please reply on my talk page.

Please note, reading WP:LEAD may lead you to believe that the intro section is fine as it stands, I disagree completely. The key word being concise, which Diabetes's is definitely not. Thanks for your comments. --Storkk 23:08, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your prompt reply. I was not aware of (and indeed, have never seen) a cleanup template (be it rewrite, copyedit, confusing, intro length, etc.) on its Talk page. Hence I didnt even check it. I have seen it only on the main page of the article (so that editors can see it without reviewing the talk page (as well as the fact that the addition of the tag automatically categorizes the article in the appropriate cleanup category)). I recognize that Diabetes mellitus is an important article, so I'd appreciate your thoughts. Thanks. --Storkk 23:23, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
While I don't entirely disagree with you, the {{intro length}} tag categorizes the article itself into Category:Wikipedia_introduction_cleanup. The talk page does not need this cleanup. But the main reason I disagree with putting it on the talk page is that nobody sees it (I gather that this is the main reason you moved it there in the first place). If editors see it, there's a chance something might happen. If they have to be interested enough (or have enough of an objection) in the article to read the talk page, you start weeding out a huge majority of editors who might otherwise help. This is just my 2¢ -- I feel quite strongly about this, but won't put it back up myself (for a while anyway) in deference to your opinion. Please try to ensure that it's done, though. Many thanks, Storkk 23:39, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

My Edits[edit]

Hi Jfdwolff -

I see that you have been reverting the edits that I have made to some pages, calling my contributions "spam". I have posted no links to any page to which I or any other person to whom I have associations make profit of any kind.

These are "on topic" programs, usually featuring not for profit charities, posted for the purpose of sharing information.


Star of Life[edit]

Star of life2.svg Star of Life
For your superb and tireless contributions to medical articles, I hereby award you the Star of Life. --Cat out 05:05, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Have another one also[edit]

To JFW for exceptional work on improving coeliac disease. It now probably the best internet source on the subject. Well done. -- Samir धर्म 07:29, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I even spelled it with an o. -- Samir धर्म 07:29, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Moving Rhygin to Ivanhoe Martin?[edit]

I think it would make sense to move Rhygin to Ivanhoe Martin (and redirect Rhygin to Ivanhoe Martin). Ivanhoe Martin is currently just redirecting to The Harder They Come. Nephron  T|C 21:59, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Jewish vs. Judeo renaming[edit]

Hello Dr. Wolff : Your learned input would be greatly appreciated at User talk:ThuranX#Your past nominations to rename (Wikipedia:Undeletion policy). See my comments there please. Thanks. IZAK 14:35, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


Greetings. I take your tone as seeking to find a common ground on "==Non-medical consequences to obesity==". And I appreciate the positive element contained therein. What do you think about the government study indicating $275,000,000 additional cost to transport an overweight flying public? That just sounds like a fact to me...not anyone's opinion. Cheers. Winkwink 20:14, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I made it clear that this would be worth mentioning, as opposed to several other points you made. Please see my comment on Talk:Obesity. JFW | T@lk 06:51, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

on PPH and rare diseases[edit]

Hi there, I wasn't sure whether it would be best to put this on your personal talk page or the article talk page. Anyway, I took the List of rare diseases at its word — pulmonary hypertension is listed there — and included it in the PH article. I didn't verify its claimed "rare status", which I guess I should have done. Thanks for catching my mistake. --Tachikoma 16:32, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I had decided to include the link because of that List page, even though as you rightfully point out, PH isn't that rare. I can think of a bunch of other diseases which are much much rarer, like the genetic disease that causes extremely premature aging (sorry, I forget the name). A category link would be fine, if you choose to include it. --Tachikoma 20:28, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes, progeria is the disease that I was thinking about. Thanks for reminding me about the name. --Tachikoma 20:54, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

External Links on BI article[edit]

So who determines 'relevance'? You? I notice that the pro-implant political link (and it is political - Libertarian) is ahead of Dr. Zuckerman's site. Where in the policy does it say relevance? Can you show me?Leonard60 21:26, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

I am familiar with NPOV. Why did you place a non-neutral Libertarian site ahead of the Center for WOmen's health, and why did you totally remove the Alliance? NPOV is clearly in the eye of the beholder.Leonard60 21:39, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
I see you wrote some of the "razer" site - you determine who is POV by your own POV? Leonard60 21:44, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
As to Fumento Libertarian article, that is clearly a 'pro'. Alliance for Justice and NOW are clearly 'con'. Perhaps those should be separated. I don't know if you are aware of the "Libertarian" movment in the US, but it is basically "buyer beware".Leonard60 21:47, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
A "pro" and "con" might be a good idea. That too is troublesome because some of the 'studies' were funded by Dow and were heavily criticized by scientists - particuarly the Harvard and Mayo studies which the 1999 IOM review quoted. Do those go under "pro"? I would think so. I don't believe them for a second - I know better. However, some are obviously political - like Fumento's article. Let's see what we can do on this.Leonard60 21:51, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Benzodiazepine is a mess[edit]

I made a similar request for help on this article earlier today: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Drugs#Benzodiazepine.

There was a ProjectBenzo which did a lot of work to improve the individual drugs, especially Diazepam. I'm not sure it is still active.

An example of the limited areas that I could help can be found in my recent edits to phenobarbital. I think, however, that benzodiazepine needs the kind of sorting-out that only an expert could reliably perform. I can always review the English, and such things, if requested.

Regards, Colin°Talk 22:22, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

We need a [psycho]pharmacologist for that one. JFW | T@lk 06:54, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
I know a couple, but they're not Wikipedians. I could try and get them on board if you don't know any? --PaulWicks 07:35, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Chronic granulomatous disease[edit]

I'm in the process of expaned this article...I noticed that you worked on this article in the past and I'd be interested in input you may have. Thanks.--Jfurr1981 04:17, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

I had to read up significantly before I could expand that article. I leave the rest of the work for you :-). If you have any specific queries I'm happy to have a peek. JFW | T@lk 13:11, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Edits on Hemochromatosis[edit]

1) Skin pigmentation is melanin not iron oxides. Presumably, this is a reaction to catalysis of free radical reactions by iron. 2) Hearing loss is a well-established symptom. May be secondary to binding of iron to melanin in stria vascularis. Cisplatin ototoxicity may have similar etiology. 3) Dyskinesias and neuropsychiatric symptoms also present in some patients.

Please discuss before reverts-- I have given cites. I'm MD, PhD-- I have been publishing on this disease for over three decades. I hate edit wars. Pproctor 05:25, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

postmarketing surveillance?[edit]

hi there doc,

i just wikified "postmarketing surveillance" in the Mifepristone article, and it is a redlink--is the concept already hidden elsewhere as another article? (in which case we could do a redirect) or should there be a little article about it, what is is, how it varies from country to country, etc? i think it's especially important thing to be able to wikify for lay readers... thanks, Cindery 16:33, 16 September 2006 (UTC)'s a deal. i started it: postmarketing surveillance, but it is quite lame so far :-) -- and totally U.S-centric. i will go start doing my homework on other, no doubt, know a great deal about Europe...(do you know if they have anything comparable to US/European postmarketing in developing countries??) Cindery 20:29, 16 September 2006 (UTC)