Talk:Issels treatment

This page was proposed for deletion by RHaworth (talk · contribs) on 31 July 2008 with the comment:
advert / non-notable unless references are provided
It was contested by DGG (talk · contribs) on 2008-08-02 with the comment:
notable, but article needs further work

Medicine: Hematology-oncology Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Hematology-oncology task force.

Reliable sources

There are no reliable sources in the article at present. Let's find some. I'll start: the American Cancer Society has labeled this treatment as ineffective. Interestingly, this article was forked off Josef Issels after repeated attempts to remove that source. Can we get some additional reliable, independent sources describing this treatment and its uses? If not, this article should be merged back into Josef Issels. MastCell ^Talk 20:47, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and stubbed the article, focusing on verifiable information from reliable sources and leaving out original research as Wikipedia's policies demand. It can certainly be expanded, but let's have some reliable sources available before doing so, as its previous incarnation was entirely unsourced and highly promotional. MastCell ^Talk 22:48, 8 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marketing in the United States

The following sentence appears in this article:

"The Issels Treatment is unapproved in the United Kingdom but is marketed in the United States at a reported cost, in 2005, of £45,000"

I have never heard of anything being marketed in th United Sates with a cost in pounds. Some clarifaction, and the cost in dollars, would be good. Tad Lincoln (talk) 01:11, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read the cited source? It's from the BBC. So while they describe the marketing of the treatment in the US, they give all costs in pounds. Similarly, if an American news source describes a product marketed overseas, it will typically give the cost in dollars, to make it clearer to their target audience. One could convert it and provide the cost in dollars, but the source itself does not do so, as it is a British source. MastCell ^Talk 05:13, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]