Talk:Jeryl Lynn

Medicine 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.

Pharmacology

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology 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.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Topic of the article

There are two topics possibly at hand here:

The Jeryl Lynn strains of Mumps virus, the topic of this article.
Jeryl Lynn Hilleman the namesake of these viral strains, the topic of an as-yet unwritten article.

I suppose some people might like to muddy the waters by adding some verbiage to this vaccine page. Heathhunnicutt 00:38, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is a better written version. I suggest going back to it, then adding a few things from there: http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Jeryl_Lynn&oldid=54807739 (Comment entered by Midgley (talk · contribs · count), regarding previous version also written by him.)

Truth of a statement

Is it true that Dr. Hilleman was involved in vaccine research prior to cultivating the virus? That needs a reference. Heathhunnicutt 00:39, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jerryl Lynn Hilleman links (of interest for a biographical page)

Probably http://www.aspeninstitute.org/atf/cf/%7BDEB6F227-659B-4EC8-8F84-8DF23CA704F5%7D/shillemn.jpeg

http://www.aspeninstitute.org/site/c.huLWJeMRKpH/b.612937/k.123E/1999_TripleCrown_Class.htm

http://www.symyx.com/

http://investor.symyx.com/downloads/bio_hilleman.jpg

Although nothing is made of it there. I suppose it would be polite to mention this article to her, and check. Midgley 19:08, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

THe article isn't greatly improved - for instance, why was Dr Hilleman able to culture Mumps virus from her throat? I don't see removing "contracted mumps" as helping the reader. As for the truth of the statement - it would be reasonable to follow the link given for her father to find out what he was doing then, and later. Several of these remarks are quite rude, and converting the redirect from JLH's name to this article into blank article, and then proposing to speedy it as a page does not seem helpful to me. I think we had best have a thid opinion on this - who would you like to ask? Midgley 01:28, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

Too many too small too repetitive. A maze of tiny articles, all alike. Bring the trademark name article and any more on specific preparations of JLV into here. Easier to read. Reduces duplication. 02:14, 24 May 2006 (UTC) (Comment entered by Midgley (talk · contribs · count))

Single jab

A number of scientists, researchers and doctors have expressed serious concerns about lack of access to single jabs, due to the potential for immune interference related to the timing of vaccinations, the extreme crowding of vaccination schedule. The lack of single jab alternatives to combination vaccinations would allow more time for immune system recovery from adverse vaccube reactions, immune interference, and natural exposure to diseases. A new wave of reports indicates that individuals with family histories of unusual reactions to certain diseases or vaccines may be particularly prone to neurological damage caused by combination vaccines, including the MMR, which includes the Jeryl Lynn vaccine. Removal of any mention in this article of the controversies swirling in every direction around the Jeryl Lynn vaccine would seem to be contrary to the very notion of npov and informed consent. Rather than eliminating all reference to the controversies entirely, perhaps it would be best to at least mention that the Jeryl Lynn vaccine is part of the single jab alternative to the MMR, and is being recommended by a growing minority doctors who are especially cautious when it comes to the principle of avoiding harm to the patient, a tenet viewed by some as the first priority of medicine. Ombudsman 22:53, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have already and recently been admonished for your disingenuous approach to vaccine-related articles. Any person comparing the edit histories for your most recent two edits (first [1], then [2]) can easily see why I reverted the first edit -- your attempt to include Vaccine controversy material that is too-well-covered elsewhere in other articles, such as MMR. Your second attempt I am also reverting, as the topics of Dr. Hilleman and MMR are covered elsewhere and you are apparently trying to till soil for your "single-jab" evangelism which is misnomered, anyway. I agree with you that wikipedia should inform readers of the possibility of receiving monovalent constituent vaccines. I'm aware of the allegations recently in Washington and Oregon, USA surrounding VZV vaccine. However, I am sure that simply linking to relevant articles in the See Also section will make for a much better article and that is the reversion and edit I am about to perform. I would advise you to stop propagating your edits relating to Hilleman, the vaccine controversy, etc., other than to make relevant edits on pages appropriate to the article. I added {{merge}} templates and {{fact}} templates to MMR Vaccine. Please address them promptly as I am planning to perform that merge very soon. Heathhunnicutt 00:37, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dude,I think you are violating the probation you were placed under six (6) hours ago: Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Cesar_Tort_and_Ombudsman_vs_others. Heathhunnicutt 00:50, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ombudsman isn't violating his parole yet, but if he continues to edit war on this article he may be found in breach of the parole and, at the discretion of an administrator, may be banned from editing it further. Discussion with a view to persuading other editors is advisable prior to any edit. --Tony Sidaway 09:18, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]