Talk:Seizure/Archive 1

Archive 1

There

There is a question whether "temporal lobe epilepsy" (the more common term these days is "partial complex") is actually overdiagnosed in surrealists and individuals sympathetic to surrealism who are self-consciously attempting to practice surrealist theory, particularly as regards the interictal aspects of TLE (though the notion of an "interictal personality" has come under some question). The practice of automatism, for instance, tends by its nature to result in hypergraphia, and, moreover, the founder of surrealism, Andre Breton, wrote that "here as elsewhere, quality becomes a function of quantity" and "there is no subject upon which one should refuse to speak and write voluminously." Daniel C. Boyer — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.219.44.92 (talk) approx. 15:43, 25 February 2002 (UTC)

---

Added external link to my article on temporal-lobe epilepsy and surrealism in Brand X.

Daniel C. Boyer — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.219.44.92 (talk) 13:25, 12 March 2002 (UTC)

---

Mention of automatisms in particular should bring up question about existence of the Pre-automatic dictatorship. --Daniel C. Boyer — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.213.34.103 (talk) 10:03, 7 June 2002 (UTC)

• • Daniel,

How do these surrealists manage to fool the EEG into recording epileptical activity if they don't really have EEG. Even NES don't show up as epileptical activity — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.162.184.14 (talk) 16:34, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

• • • I don't exactly understand the question; something might have gotten cut off. But clearly this relates more to the non-EEG symptoms. --Daniel C. Boyer (talk) 01:56, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Grand mal/petit mal

I noticed that petit mal seizure has its own article, and assumed that the link provided at the bottom there for grand mal seizure meant that the latter also has a seperate article. Oops. siafu 18:36, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps petit mal seizure should be merged here. JFW | T@lk 18:45, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The terms petit mal and grand mal (as well as a few others) have fallen into disuse. The accepted medical phrasiology is used almost exclusively now. The seizure types article goes into detail about this. sinewave^Talk   23:10, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Types

The terms here are out-of-date. Phrases such as "petit-mal" and "grand-mal" were consigned to the medical history books long ago. The International League Against Epilepsy have classified seizures and defined the terms used by doctors today. This section would be much improved if it was more complete and used the modern terms. There is duplication here with the epilepsy article section "Types of Seizures". I think the section belongs here and the epilepsy article should concentrate on seizure disorders, associated diseases and chronic management of the condition. --Colin 21:20, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Agree 100%. Epilepsy classification by etiology and syndrome; seizure classification by clinical semiology; up-to-date ILAE terminology in either case; with 'grand mal' and 'petit mal' defined for historical reasons. I'll undertake to do this sometime when I have 4 or 5 hours free unless there are further objections. -Ikkyu2 21:36, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Please do so, Ikkyu2. I think you're qualified enough for that monumental task. References especially welcome. JFW | T@lk 21:52, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

I have removed the parenthetical references to grand mal and petit mal throughout. I included a brief statement about them falling into disuse after 1970, and encouraged readers to visit the Seizure types main article for details. Fracture^Talk   08:58, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

engine seizure

In a seizure, the pistons expand from too much heat, become too big for the walls of the cylinders, seize them, melt to them sometimes, and lock the engine and rear wheel and start the whole cycle into a skid. -- Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

I didn't see a place to put this, so I'm going to put it here. Maybe there will be a disambiguation page created one day. -- Sy / ^(talk) 17:25, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The WikiStandard

According to Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales, NPOV is "absolute and non-negotiable."

This is an attributable entry and the facts contained herein are non-negotiable and such fact cannot be hotly disputed. It is not a strong view, just a presentation of fact. It is NOT original thought nor opinion.

I have responded unfavorably to (hope this has been resolved on my talk page) Jfdwolff who demanded the following:

"Unless you can demonstrate unequivocally that the professional societies approve the use of cannabis for seizures, or you can demonstrate that a very large subgroup of epilepsy patients uses cannabis specifically to prevent seizures, I'd very much like you to keep this material out of Wikipedia."

None of that is required nor part of Wikipedia's standard (but was really only about original thought) WP:NPOV WP:ATT

Tampering with this entry constitutes

• An act contrary to Wikipedia's standard
• A strong view contrary to referenced and attributable fact
• Conspiracy to withhold referenced information from the public
• An illogical bias towards a medical profession of proven malice for profit
• A malicious action against sick people that carries liability for that action

Therefore I have every right to add referenced Federation Proceedings AND everyone has the right to view referenced Federation Proceedings

I have removed the "Federation Proceedings" section from the article. There have been literally thousands of trials of drugs for their anticonvulsant effect. Even aspirin has been shown to have anticonvulsant properties. The study that had been added was over 50 years old and involved only 5 very sick children. It is not statistically relevant. There is modern research that indicates some anticonvulsant effect from cannabis and its ingredients. However, it may make some seizure types worse and the side effects may be worse than other established drugs. This research may one day lead to an effective treatment for some seizure types. We are not there yet and Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. See [1] and [2] for some lay comment and [3] for a professional review. There is no "conspiracy" of WP editors. Colin°^Talk 22:03, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Please review WP:NPOV#Undue weight, and stop making personal attacks. Thank you. JFW | T@lk 22:15, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

A personal attack is when someone is forced to take poisons you support and demand are the only treatment in existence. That is a personal attack on everyone that does harm and personal injury. In preventing the dissemination of real information you attack AND harm thousands and deserve any response of words that comes your way as a result. Alphaquad 19:02, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Seizures Hints

Sorry to be an uninformed person here, but can anyone exactly say what a seizure is. I had some in 2004 so I really still do not understand any of the information provided. Send the info to my chat box if anyone knows it. Is it a cause in a person's attitude, a change of mentallity, a sexual thing that occurs from certain sensations, or a taste of liquids?--Zhang Liao 06:42, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't know where else to say this, but I got rid of the "seizure warning" section on this page, because this could make EVERYONE sick by watching it. That is not a good idea to have a site such as that there, I might have a tiny tiny bit of med-induced seizure side effects, but watching that for a split second made me sick, and I had to cover my eyes just to close the link. For everyone's safety, and particularly for epileptics, I deleted that section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.45.194.5 (talk) 14:25, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Let The Readers Decide

Information of trials showing a treatment that produced results that were unachievable with traditional treatment is a threat to your agenda and is a threat to the credibility of the ludicrous medical profession of symptom assassination and its ignorance of proper treatment, nothing more than a cover-up.

You would jump at the chance to present the information if you actually cared about people. Clearly your agenda is more important than the health of others, which fits within the definition of conspiracy to present only your biased position. This is demonstrated by the invention of unwritten guidelines. Such was as length remark in Talk:Anticonvulsant. It does not go unnoticed.

When the written guidelines are not in dispute, you invent unwritten guidelines to fit your agenda of conspiracy to withhold this vital information.

"NPOV says that the article should fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by a verifiable source, and should do so in proportion to the prominence of each."

Federation Proceedings is not only a significant viewpoint but also references more than a single trial. If you actually read it, in an unbiased fashion, you might see that. It is not of only 5 children as suggested.

The unprofitable drugs of traditional medicine, is connected to trials far older than 50 years. The suggestion that "it may make some seizure types worse..." is only another invented opinion presented to validate your weak and limited position, has no basis in fact and is without reference. Clearly more drivel contrary to guidelines. You harp about guidelines but cannot adhere to them.

Deletion of the entry "Federation Proceedings" is in conflict with the WP:NPOV#Undue weight of the Seizure article. The real undue weight is on the part of presenting only what you want to see.

Calling you on your act of conspiracy is not a personal attack but a description of your biased behavior.

The verifiable info is here for readers to be the judge since you continue to block its proper use in the article to fit an agenda.

Jean P. Davis M.D., and H.H. Ramsey, M.D.

The demonstration of anticonvulsant activity of the tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) cogeners by laboratory tests (Loewe and Goodman, Federation Proc. 6:352, 1947) prompted clinical trial in five institutionalized epileptic children. All of them had symptomatic grand mal epilepsy with retardation; three has cerebral palsy in addition. EEG tracings were grossly abnormal in the entire group; three has focal seizure activity. Their attacks had been inadequately controlled on 0.13 gm. of Phenobarbital daily, combined with 0.3 gm. of Dilantin per day in two of the patients, and in a third, with 0.2 gm. of Mesantoin daily.

Two isomeric 3(1,2-dimethyl heptyl) homologs of THC were tested, numbers 122 and 125A, with ataxia potencies 50 and 8 times, respectively, that of natural Marijuana principles. Number 122 was given to 2 patients for 3 weeks and to 3 patients for 7 weeks. 3 responded at least as well to previous therapy; the 4th became almost completely and the 5th entirely seizure free. One patient transferred to 125A after 3 weeks, had prompt exacerbation of seizures during the ensuing 4 weeks, despite dosages up to 4 mg. daily. The 2nd patient transferred to 125A was adequately controlled on this dosage, except for a brief period of paranoid behavior three and a half weeks later; similar episodes had occurred prior to cannabinol therapy. Other psychic disturbances or toxic reactions were not manifested during the periods of treatment. Blood counts were normal. The cannabinoids herein reported deserve further trial in non-institutionalized epileptics. Reprinted from Federation Proceedings, Federation of American Society for Experimental Biology, vol 8, 1949, p.284.

These proceedings demonstrate unequivocally the Anticonvulsant properties of cannabinoids. This is not opinion but fact and is therefore "absolute and non-negotiable" in accordance with WP:NPOV.

Your true colors have been seen and can only be covered up through improper deletion of this talk page entry. Will that be your next act of conspiracy? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alphaquad (talk • contribs) 05:34, 20 March 2007 (UTC).

The above trial did not involve "traditional treatment". There is no tradition of use, nor are "isomeric 3(1,2-dimethyl heptyl) homologs of THC" anything other than the precise products of the pharmaceutical industry. Colin°^Talk 19:39, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

What you cant understand English text? The "traditional treatment" it involved (it has to be spelled out for you), was that of "Their attacks had been inadequately controlled on 0.13 gm. of Phenobarbital daily, combined with 0.3 gm. of Dilantin per day in two of the patients, and in a third, with 0.2 gm. of Mesantoin daily". In layman's terms, it did not work. "... products of the pharmaceutical industry". What's your point? It was working and they used marijuana has their guide. You're really starting to sound somewhat challenged in your ability to understand the text.

What is acceptable to the FDA is fraud, conspiracy (since 1937, what was then the "FBNDD" Federal Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs) and poison, and should in no way be used as a measuring device of acceptability. This is perfectly UNreasonable criterion. Small minds can only wonder.

There is no tradition. Duh of course not. Not since the 1937 Hemp Tax Transfer Law – a conspiracy of worshipping at the alter of Mammon and here as well. This alone would wake a caring person enough to the see the light as it were. Seems we must exclude you from that group huh? "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter"

Note of confirmation for this: From clandestine research Edgewood Arsenal, Maryland, Dr. Sim reported to Medical World News: "Marijuana… is probably the most potent anti-epileptic known to medicine today". Marijuana Medical Handbook, Todd Mikuriya, M.D. And we should ignore this public announcement for what reason, because of the media manipulations of disinformation inducing a lack of tradition and for the conspiracy of the FDA/DEA in blocking all research? "I don't think so Tim" Alphaquad 12:04, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah. I misinterpreted your use of the phrase "traditional treatment" which is often used wrt "traditional remedies" ie. plants. Apologies. The opinion of one pro-Marijuana MD who managed to get a book published by a minor publisher isn't notable enough. He's clearly exaggerating since there haven't been enough studies and what there have been haven't shown such spectacular results. However, as I've indicated previously, there is research on this issue. Have a look at [http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/pdf/10.1046/j.1528-1157.2001.19301.x this] paper. I'll have a think about this and may incorporate something very brief into the epilepsy article where is more applicable than this article. It isn't likely to deviate from the conclusions in that paper. Colin°^Talk 12:38, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

"Insufficiently controlled" may well mean that seizure frequency is reduced but not a lot. Modern anti-epileptics are really quite good.

I would not take the Marijuana Medical Handbook to be a reliable source. Conspiracies are only encyclopedic if they are confirmed conspiracies, not just some theory by someone. JFW | T@lk 12:06, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

You mean as in convicted criminals of conspiracy then, when there is no way they are going to convict their selves. If we go by that then we are lambs to slaughter without opinion. And whose opinion is the only valid one, yours? This is so ridiculous and absurd that I must question once again intent to conceal. Anything presenting opposing opinion to your own is not a reliable source. Quite evident to me what is going on here. Alphaquad 12:24, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

As JFW says, modern drugs are good. However, for decades there have been a stubborn 30% who don't fully respond and all the latest drugs haven't "made a dent" in that figure (see WebMD reporting on tomorrow's Lancet). I'd love that situation to change. Colin°^Talk 12:38, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

So you're both Doctors of Internal Medicine? Then I demand you discuss all adverse reactions with patients before deciding together course of treatment, including all remedies regardless of law, and should be easy for you since you seem to agree on the unethical nature of pharmaceutical companies and the government, respecting patient opinion regardless of your own, otherwise your actions become unethical. This seems a quite informative page. You owe it to everyone to know the reality of the situation, especially to that 30% who don't fully respond to poison. Also cases you claim as a success are certainly not monitored for any significant duration, only as long as you are signing the prescription pad. It would no doubt be enlightening to see where the majority of them end up. Scary thought indeed. But if you're here everyday editing wiki, then there must be few patients for you to kill or turn into Sulphur and Fluorine crazed zombies. Somewhat of a relief. Thank you for your time, it has been a pleasure discussing all this but truly sad for those who wont get correct information on the usually read pages for your effort or lack thereof. Alphaquad 14:19, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not a doctor of anything. Epilepsy patients are monitored long-term, whether by their GP or a neurologist. It isn't a "here's a prescription, now off you go..." type of condition. Colin°^Talk 14:35, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

This is personal experience I relate. It is exactly that, "here's a prescription, now off you go...", and I will produce the records to prove it. The monitoring stops when the epileptic stops returning. In this case information finally got to them about real medicine and his or her seizures stopped immediately. You really must think ill of my knowledge, but may not be the case since I think you said you are not in America. This is America and 911 should be your first clue, we just don't care; well far too many of us, myself not included of course. Maybe things are done differently from where you write.

Also I returned to add: As case after case demonstrates, money is god in America and government is at odds with reality over this false god. All companies involved with large sums of money should be the first source deemed unreliable, and the little guy like Dr. Mikuriya should be considered gold. Peace and health my brothers.

Urgent note to Colin relating to my departing theme and comes from a real reporter: The demonizing of Iran has begun in the media, dont miss this article. Alphaquad 16:20, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I won't ask what a month's old news on Iran has to do with the Seizure article, and why it should be "urgent". I truly don't want to know. My participation in this discussion ends now. We've both said our piece. Cheers, Colin°^Talk 16:51, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

i wonder what the safety procedures are —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aerowolf9 (talk • contribs) 18:52, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Physical examination

I do not think this part is explained well enough. Lay people reading this article will not understand the terminology used to explain the study. DanMcScience (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 04:04, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Management

I've largely replaced the text here. The phrase "semi supine position" is probably unintelligable to 99% of the population and the recovery position is well known and recommended. In addition, the advice to "apply strong upward pression on the chin" goes against recommended treatment and is potentially dangerous. Finally, the need to call paramedics is overstated, causing additional embarrasment to those with epilepsy who have a typical seizure.

I am aware the Wikipedia is not a First Aid Manual. However, removing this section will merely perpetuate the ignorance of the general public in treating seizures. The section "Responding to a seizure" in epilepsy covers similar ground. IMO, the focus of the two articles is not currently well defined, with the epilepsy article covering much that should be in the seizure article. --Colin 21:20, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure, but I heard of a treatment in psychology class where there was some kind of left-brain right-brain ectomy to stop some kind of seizure. I'm not familiar with the term, but it involved cutting the connections that where between the left and right brain. Just wondering if anyone knew the info. I'll look through my old notes just to make sure I'm simply remembering something else from psych.

Have a look at epilepsy – surgical treatment. You are probably thinking of callosotomy --Colin 09:34, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

You're thinking of a hemispherectomy. They are performed mostly in kids because their brains can recover. They also do resecting and lobectomies in adults. -SP — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.62.178.3 (talk) 06:51, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Seizure response dog

I think the bit at the end about animals sensing seizures before they happen is at best controversial. -paul 22/4/06

It is extremely controversial and actually ridiculous. -Rob 30 May 06

Agreed: unnecessary, bordering on ridiculous. Preacherdoc 21:57, 30 May 2006 (UTC)Preacherdoc

Well, have a look at seizure response dog, follow the links/references. (Note: I have modified this article since the above comments were made) Colin°^Talk 22:12, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

The first aid treatment for sezure is don't touch or press the patient, don't put any thing into the patient's mouth and remove all dangerous stuff away from the patient. When the patient finished with the fit, put the patient into a recovery position, by put one hand under the patient's head and another hand acroos over the body,the led of the side that the arm across over also across the body so that the patient will have a good airway and won't roll around, if the patient is unconscious. Then call the ambulance if there's injuries to the patient or the fit lasted for more than 5 minutes or another fit start. Fist aider of St. John Ambulance — Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.239.194.127 (talk) 21:06, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Question

Okay so, is it a seizure when someone is pretty much just waking up and when they do their whole body gets tingly (sorry for poor use of words, it's the only way I can explain it)as if the whole body has fallen asleep like a leg or arm falling asleep. they cant move their body at all, sometimes can't breathe but has prety much has full conciousness of what's going on... they'd have to really struggle to be able to get out of this type of "episode". So is that a seizure, and if not what could it be??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.174.129.182 (talk) 05:29, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm not a doctor, but just for fun I'll play one on television :-) It almost sounds like a hypnagogic spell. Except I dont' know about the "tingly" part. 209.244.30.221 (talk) 21:03, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

That is sleep paralysis. --71.205.100.59 (talk) 00:28, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Should someone with epileptic seizures be alone?

Well, I was at work, and one of my customers told me she has epileptic siezures. She looks like she is older than me, I'm 22, so I'd guess she is 25-30, but I could be wrong. She lives on her own, apparently her 10 year old son moved out (most likley to his dad's or her parents or something). Anyways, I knew somewhat what this is about, I knew she could drop and shake violently without notice. But then I started to feel a bit concerned about her after I left. I was wondering if someone with this condition should be left alone... Because I did read off this wikipedia that if its less than 5 minutes no help is required, and if its longer than that 911 should be called. If this is the case, couldn't she go under for 30 minutes, smashing whatever body parts into anything around her at that time?

I don't have a login to this wikipedia, so if you could notify me of a response by emailing me at wikipedia@codinggroundz.com that would be great!

Thanks!
Shawn

72.39.167.100 (talk) 16:04, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

There is a difference between having epilepsy, and having poorly, or uncontrolled epilepsy. And there are differences in the types of seizures people have. I have seizures daily, but I'm legally allowed to drive- I never have the type of seizure you are talking about without several hours warning. It would be ridiculous to have someone stay with me 24/7 because 3 hours might not be enough to call someone and let them know what will be happening. And I've only had a handful of tonic clonic seizures in my life time —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.162.184.14 (talk) 16:31, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

What is a convulsion?

Convulsion redirects to this page. As you can see from the "what links here", there are many articles linking to convulsion, but in this article there is hardly any mention of the term "convulsion". As a medical layman I have no idea whether a convulsion is a synonym for an epileptic seizure, or a non-epileptic seizure, or something that looks like a seizure. Maybe someone with a better background could explain the term "convulsion" here or replace the redirect page by a short article. Han-Kwang (t) 14:08, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Convulsions are a type of seizure. They can occur in either epileptic or NES. Many people mistakenly think that a seizure means you will convulse. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.162.191.142 (talk) 04:41, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Cleaning up this and related articles

I think that the three following articles - epilepsy, seizures (which leads to epileptic seizures), and non-epileptic seizures, all need to be re-organized and re-done. First off, to have seizures redirect to epileptic seizures is incorrect, as not all seizures are epileptic. In addition to this, the definition then given to epileptic seizures is incorrect, as epileptic seizures only apply to those seizures which are recurrent. Additionally, non-epileptic seizures do involve rhythmic cortical discharge, contrary to the definition given. Any thoughts?

justin.kirkham (talk) 16:13, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

I'll address your points in order. I agree that all three articles could be improved, but I haven't sat down and made the time to do so yet. I'm assuming that this article refers to epileptic seizures per the guidelines at WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Clearly it's arguable whether epileptic seizures are, in fact, the primary topic for Seizure, but I at least agree that it is the primary topic. As far as the definition goes, the cited source establishes that this is the consensus definition agreed to by the International League Against Epilepsy (ILAE) and the International Bureau for Epilepsy (IBE). The source goes on to give the consensus definition for epilepsy as "a disorder of the brain characterized by an enduring predisposition to generate epileptic seizures and by the neurobiologic, cognitive, psychological, and social consequences of this condition [which] requires the occurrence of at least one epileptic seizure." From this, we get that a person can have an epileptic seizure and yet not have epilepsy. If you disagree with this definition, please provide alternative reliable sources and we can change the definition or provide multiple definitions. As far as your last point, I haven't looked at that article recently but there's the same issue - we need a reliable source that provides a different and/or better definition. VernoWhitney (talk) 16:30, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Agree with VernoWhitney on all points. Someone can have an epileptic seizure without having epilepsy. The "recurrent" requirement only applies to a diagnosis of epilepsy (it is its definition). I've tweaked the lead sentence as it wasn't exactly quoting the ILAE definition. The key is that the activity is abnormally excessive or abnormally synchronous (some texts use the jargon hypersynchronous, but we should avoid jargon especially in the lead). Neither apply to non-epileptic seizures.

I'd love to see these articles improved but also have found it hard to find the time. Colin°^Talk 17:49, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Suggested move to Epileptic seizure

There is presently a discussion at WP:WikiProject Medicine#Convulsion and seizure same thing about a possible rename of this article from 'Seizure' to 'Epileptic seizure' as well as merging 'Convulsion' into this article. Any views on these issues would be welcome there. --RexxS (talk) 11:51, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Suggested move of a disambiguation page to Seizure

Seizure currently redirects to Epileptic seizure (this article). There is a proposal to move Seizure (disambiguation) to Seizure instead. Comments may be left at Talk:Seizure (disambiguation)#Requested move. Station1 (talk) 21:49, 13 June 2010 (UTC) -- Result: Discussion now closed; page was not moved. Station1 (talk) 04:47, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Huh?

I am not a professional in the medical field and I found this article way too confusing to follow. For now I'll go elsewhere to gather information. However most Wikipedia articles I have had no trouble following-- even if I am not a subject matter expert for whatever topic the article is covering.

For someone who has the aptitude I think the whole page would benefit from a re-write.

Erik — Preceding unsigned comment added by Erik4213 (talk • contribs) 03:35, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Seconded. For a reader who just wants to know what a seizure is, this is a hopeless article. These jargony medical articles really are the scourge of Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.189.115.248 (talk) 23:00, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

• I think the entire reason people have a problem with this is they come to this page with the mistaken idea that seizures are just something that make you shake, and then they get angry when nothing says that (and of course it wouldn't because there are types of seizures out there that don't involve any convulsion at all. The entire explanation of what a seizure is lies in your brain and neuronal activity. Its not something that can be dumbed down because they're aren't laymans terms for these things. Ie you can't say "its when your brain cells do a happy dance which affects your behavior, thinking, movement, etc" Perhaps an opening that says there are differing types of seizures, and not all result in convulsions or tremors, with a note to scroll down would appease those who are looking for a simple explanation rather than an explanation of what a seizure actually is — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.162.183.14 (talk) 19:46, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Erik, this was useless!!! Blue :( — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.120.141.68 (talk) 01:58, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Reviews

• Adams, SM (2007 May 1). "Evaluation of a first seizure". American family physician. 75 (9): 1342–7. PMID 17508528. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:18, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Add Content

I think this article should have info about seizures caused by red lights flashing really fast.66.72.205.132 (talk) 00:51, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

173.169.62.127 (talk) 05:13, 21 March 2012 (UTC)== Change over time? == Do the number and intensity change over time, with age, or is it fairly constant? Or, does it depend on the individual? I don't know, but it'd be good to include.209.244.187.155 (talk) 21:29, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

It falls under the classification of Photic Epilepsy (new terminology) in the classification as part of the Reflex Seizures (or Epilepsy). Reflex Seizures / Epilepsy is a wide horizon while not limited to: hot baths/showers/water, chewing or eating food, photic / light sensitivity, music (musicogenic seizures / epilepsy), triggered by specific "sound"; by this which can be a simple hertz (Hz) or frequency or a range (no correlation to musicogenic seizures / epilepsy; but Neuroscience is still currently studying in this area), brushing one's teeth, as well as other unusual, unique, yet, unexplained and/or unknown reasons nearly 90% of the time. Such cases do show up on EEG (electroencephalogram) or AEEG (ambulatory electroencephalogram) all the way up to in-hospital VEEG (video electroencephalogram) with the usage of a digital montage (computerized) recording.

In the case of one being Photic or Light Sensitivity, only a Neurologist. Epileptologist (A Neurologist who specializes in Epilepsy) or a Neurosurgeon who is well trained in this area to determine the issues for there are many common causes such as:

Cluster Headaches (common with men, "one-sided" headache)

Migraines (usually affects females more than men; can range from mild to moderate in severity level; usually sleep, darkness, and quiet will go away gradually. It may or may not include some degree of spots, flickering or flashing of lights which are but for a short brief moment.)

Classic Migraines (which one sees flickering to flashing of lights, tunnel vision, temporary blindness, very severe and requires immediate medical attention. A Neurologist is often summoned, if this becomes an reoccurring basis which testing will be ordered up as the Neurologist sees fit. Again, it affects females more than males, however, it is exceeding painful; vomiting, request for heat or cold compress on forehead, light sensitivity, sound sensitivity, are the most common; nevertheless there are others. It originates from the Occipital Lobe part of the brain.)

Pre-Menses - (for females; especially if one is overdue - also known as "being late" more than one week and/or on birth control pills. Of note; some females fails to notify Physicians of birth control pills they are currently taking, having been prescribed medication(s) to be treated for another medical issue; there could be drug-drug issues and/or reduction or increase of; the birth control pill itself. In some cases, some females do develop the symptoms described as above but is related to Epilepsy and falls under its own name; Catamenial Epilepsy or Catamenial Seizures.)

Hyperthyroidism and Hypothyroidism - (affects all ages; can fall into this classification and become misdiagnosed as some other type of medical condition if this medical condition had not been checked via a simple in-office or at the lab check; furthermore, especially with young children who do not have the ability of communication and limited range of scope other than "head hurts, light hurts eyes" for example.)

Meningitis - Information is thoroughly available in Wikipedia

Occipital Lobe Epilepsy also known as OLE - (affects all ages; can be overlooked and be categorized as Classic Migraines, however, it is possible for one to have both Occipital Lobe Epilepsy and/or have Migraines or Classic Migraines, it is very imperative that the Neurologist, Epileptologist, or Neurosurgeon does not "jump into conclusions" so quickly. Many females than males have been misdiagnosed as PNES or Non-Epileptic Seizures / Psychogenic Seizures and being told it was "all in their head". PNES does not stand for Pseudo Non-Epileptic Seizures, but rather Psychogenic Non-Epileptic Seizures. People with Occipital Lobe Seizures do not have Tonic Clonic also known as old terminology "Grand Mal" but they might appear as having an Absence also known in old terminology as "Petite Mal"; Simple Partial Seizures / Epilepsy and/or Complex Partial Seizures / Epilepsy can have a role in triggering an "OLE" or vice versa. It is possible for one to outgrow [further citation needed] if one was diagnosed as a child; like Rolandic Epilepsy, being benign, eventually goes away as the child grows up and matures; but not always the case. [further citation needed])

Medication(s) Induced - (affects parents, caretakers and adults) can also trigger a "misdiagnoses" of a medical condition, mainly due to failure of the patient's part of provisions of all medication, over the counter, and herbal supplements one may be taking. For there can develop a Drug-Drug reaction which has severe consequences. Usage of "recreational drugs" or also known as "street drugs" has severe consequences, especially when mixed with alcohol and denying such to Medical Personnel to Physicians out of fear of being caught. Drug screening or testing has now become a common practice in many Hospitals to Medical Practices; for the safety of the patient and liability factors. Deaths or serious consequences due to this declination of disclosure of usage of drugs and/or alcohol in addition to being prescribed medication(s) are even higher with the younger generation. Other two common issues are Medication Allergies and Medication Intolerance; the third being [citation needed] which is uncommon, yet, not rare, generally revolves around those who have HIV, Auto-immune diseases, Mitochondria, Genetic, [more citation addendum needed here] is Medication Resistance.)

Food - (all ages; can be a result from food poisoning, food allergy, food dyes, peanuts, msg, alcoholic drinks, all types of sugar-free on the market which includes diet drinks to some diet food, non-FDA approved nutrition items (whether purchased online or via health stores, gyms, or work-out centers; examples of places where such items may be easily found; in some cases, may be even found at regular "all-in-one" major chain stores to grocery stores due to popularity. Just because it is popular does not mean FDA has approved of it; read the fine print. Many will indicate it meets the FDA's requirements or exceeds, but FDA did not approve of such said product on the market. FDA is working very hard and quickly to get this off the shelves, the more they get them removed, the more they populate.) to name a few. If you suspect food is a trigger, refrain from usage of that specific food, if it makes a difference, notify your Doctor. [citation needed here; report I have dated] This is a very dated report but of note, and can be deleted at any given time. Lactose Intolerance may or may not be a trigger, best suggestion is to discuss with your Physician and have tests run, he or she might refer you to a Specialist or Neurologist who may proceed with this area, I will decline to disclose the dated report other than the first 9 words I input on Lactose.

As you can see, the scope is wide and varied. For there is more information in scope and in depth which may be found at:

173.169.62.127 (talk) 05:13, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

References

Dog responding to seizures.

I read the actual on seizure response dogs and all the chat about it, i understand that some people may think it ridiculous. I take seizures myself and my dog has never been trained in helping me but she always knows when I'm about to have one, she not just watches over me but also my baby boy. She has always been like that even as a puppy and now she is old I'm not sure if she could ever be replaced and it's sad to think I won't be able to find another dog like her. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.125.85.59 (talk) 04:30, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Poorly written

This article is essentially poorly written but I am not qualified to edit it: it states that a bitten tongue may be "helpful" - perhaps a translation issue? This article needs a doctor specializing in seizure disorders to edit it. I did not find it to overuse medical jargon as much as having grammatical errors that almost seem to be a translation problem... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chefcat123 (talk • contribs) 18:53, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Putting objects in sufferer's mouth / tongue-swallowing myth

There appears to be a common misconception that it is helpful to put objects in the mouth of someone suffering a seizure in order to help them avoid injury. I don't know how common it is, but I have heard the claim myself multiple times. I will put a brief mention in the management section, but it may be worth more attention.

Please see article: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/22/health/22real.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.143.193.132 (talk) 07:32, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Epidemiology

I removed the chart "Disability-adjusted life year for epilepsy per 100,000 inhabitants in 2004" since it visualizes data on epilepsy not seizures and can be found in the article "epilepsy". We should discern seizure and epilepsy as far as possible. Classifications for both exist separately with a good reason. Jophiel 123 (talk) 12:23, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

intro

I changed the sentence "Epileptic seizures (colloquially a fit) are brief episodes of abnormal excessive or synchronous neuronal activity in the brain" because it is incorrect. According to the full definition "An epileptic seizure is a transient occurrence of signs and/or symptoms due to abnormal excessive or synchronous neuronal activity in the brain" its the signs and symptoms that define the seizure and thus must be mentioned even though the sentence gets more complicated. Also I added the full definition of "epilepsy" (used a mix of 2005 and 2001 definition for convenience). The term "syndrome" should be avoided since there are also "epileptic syndromes" (its a disease or at least a disorder) Jophiel 123 (talk) 12:55, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Lifespans

Is there any subject matter on the lifespans of people having chronic seizures, have been diagnosed with epilepsy, getting treated for seizure disorders, etc.? Nothing in this article really even hints on mortality rates. Is this page not complete? As far as I know seizures and the treatments for seizures result in shorter lifespans.--Dana60Cummins (talk) 23:40, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

You are looking for Epilepsy#Mortality Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:17, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Ketogenic diet

"Tentative" is a pretty severe misrepresentation of the evidence. The mechanism of action of this treatment may be poorly understood and why it is effective in some patients and not others, but at this point trials have been thoroughly reviewed and I don't think anyone contends that it is always ineffective or that the portion of patients who do see a benefit from ketogenesis is insignificant. Civ77 (talk) 10:39, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Well lets look at the reference "The randomised controlled trials discussed in this review show promising results for the use of KDs in epilepsy. However, the limited number of studies, small sample sizes and a sole paediatric population resulted in a poor overall quality of evidence."[4] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:04, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Queen's University Student Editing Initiative

Hello, we are a group of medical students from Queen's University. We are working to improve this article over the next month and will be posting our planned changes on this talk page. We look forward to working with the existing Wikipedia medical editing community to improve this article and share evidence. We welcome feedback and suggestions as we learn to edit. Thanks! Niamking (talk) 18:11, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Cannabis Treatment for Epilepsy

Hi there! I'm a Queen's University student working on editing this page for a class project. Given the recent FDA approval of cannabis for the treatment of epileptic, I was hoping to update this section of the page to reflect this knowledge. Anyone have any opinions on this? Niamking (talk) 12:32, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

User:Niamking This article is about seizures themselves, rather than about epilepsy. Cannabis is already discussed at Epilepsy#Alternative_medicine and is not used for an active / ongoing seizure Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:16, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Have updated here[5] as it is officially approved not just recommended for approval. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:20, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Proposed Changes

Hello, we are a group of medical students editing this page as part of our class assignment. We have compiled a list of suggestions to improve this article and would appreciate community feedback before we proceed with these edits. Here is a list of our suggestions:

1. We propose to update the epidemiology section using more updated statistics. Our proposed changes and references can be found in the following sandbox: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:Niamking/sandbox
2. We propose to include the framework for management of a patient that is actively seizing, beginning with the initial response (ABCs, etc.) and then going over 1st line, 2nd line, and 3rd line treatments. These are outlined in the following sandbox: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:Rubab_Fatima_QMED/sandbox.
3. We propose to add more detail behind the physiological mechanism of seizures, which includes clarification in the article instead of referring to an outside topic.
4. We propose to better describe the history behind epileptic seizures, with a focus on how ancient physicians understood it and how treatment strategies were developed (especially for surgery). https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:MichelettoS/sandbox
5. We propose to improve on the discussion of ion channels and inhibitory neurons in epileptic seizure pathophysiology. This will be placed in Mechanism section, Paragraph 2, Following Sentence 4, and is outlined as follows: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:Willpidduck/sandbox.
6. We propose to improve the Mechanism section as outlined in the following Sandbox: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:ShaunQMED/sandbox.

We appreciate any and all feedback! Thanks in advance, Niamking (talk) 19:09, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Okay please make sure everyone reads WP:MEDMOS. Well lorazapam is often recommended first line, IM midazolam may in fact be better (in terms of faster stopping of a seizure). Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:00, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, rather late (and I hope, not too late - not sure of your deadlines!) to the party... Remember, treatment potentially needs to vary according to age of patient [kids vs adults] and cause/type of epilepsy. As ever, with regards to medical treatments, a great place to start is the Trip database. It sets out the different categories of evidence (primary and secondary sources, etc) in the menu bar on the right - easy, quick, and neat! And don't forget to look at the NICE guidelines (we do things differently in the UK, cf N America!). Kitb (talk) 09:40, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

References

Not the definition

"People who do not respond to the initial medications are considered to be in status epilepticus. Status epilepticus is defined as prolonged or repetitive seizures without intervening neurologic recovery and would be treated by therapies such as barbiturate coma or isoflurane anesthesia."

References

This is not the definition. The definition is based on time (more than 5 minutes). What text in the source are you looking at? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:59, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 16 October 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 20:44, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

---

Epileptic seizure → Seizure – I propose this move for three reasons. Firstly, the title is needlessly disambiguated - "seizure" (general) redirects here. Secondly, epilepsy is the tendency to experience recurrent seizures, whereas this article is about the event of a seizure. These are two separate concepts and, whilst there is a lot of overlap, it is clearer to have them divided as seizure and epilepsy. Thirdly, what about seizures that are not epileptic? The parent article "seizure" (which should be this article) should cover all seizures, and then direct to seizure types for types of seizures, and epilepsy for the condition relating to having recurrent seizures Tom (LT) (talk) 03:54, 16 October 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. Daniel Case (talk) 06:33, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

• For clarity, here is the discussion from 2010 which moved Seizure to Epileptic seizure. – Thjarkur (talk) 08:39, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
• Support Per WP:CONCISE and WP:NOTDICTIONARY. Use in the law context is not as prevalent when just using the single word, and this is the clear primary topic._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 11:56, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose. I'm not convinced that "seizure" unqualified always refers to epileptic seizures, as we also have Non-epileptic seizures. And per our article on Convulsion, "Because epileptic seizures typically include convulsions, the term convulsion is sometimes used as a synonym for seizure." This feels like a similar case to "heart attack" which redirects to Myocardial infarction, as that is usually what it refers to, but since "heart attack" is also sometimes used for Cardiac arrest, it is inappropriate to move the article to Heart attack. Rreagan007 (talk) 16:57, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
• Support for the reasons stated by User:Tom (LT) and User:ZXCVBNM. Non-epileptic seizures are rare. Most lawyers know that when one uses the word "seizure," one is normally referring to seizures caused by epilepsy. The word would be interpreted as referring to the state's seizure of persons or property only if one is speaking about a specific arrest or investigation, or criminal procedure in general. --Coolcaesar (talk) 19:51, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
• Comment: Not an expert here, but my impression is that non-epileptic seizures are not rare. Febrile seizures in babies (affecting an estimated 2–10% of children) and seizures caused by bad reaction to medications or recreational drugs, for example, do not seem uncommon. In fact, after a quick look at a couple of articles, my rough guess is that more people (or a roughly equal number) are affected by non-epileptic seizures than by epilepsy (depending, perhaps, on the definition of epilepsy). Personally, I would be WP:SURPRISEd to find it assumed that a seizure is an epileptic seizure. —BarrelProof (talk) 19:33, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
• Support. When I saw this I assumed that there was some conflict between this and some other definition of seizure (like seizing money, for example), but since seizure on its own already redirects here, it makes sense to use the more concise and natural title. kennethaw88 • talk 22:14, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
• Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 18:51, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Annie. M. coydbc.com

Seizure may be a confident people may take for a seizure to cause infinite style of puke maybe three words for a seizure infinite may be gone for the last of the person that had the seizure 209.222.163.69 (talk) 18:16, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Conflicting info on prevalence

The article opening states 1% of the population at any given time, but the infobox says 10%. I don't have the expertise to say which is right but presumably one of them is wrong! 135.180.132.137 (talk) 20:03, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Prevalence is 0.5-1% which is percentage at any point in time. Lifetime risk for a seizure is 10%, i.e. 1 person in 10 may have a seizure during the course of a lifetime. TMM53 (talk) 05:37, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

I have amended the qualifier description in the box to reflect this. 🙂 Kitb (talk) 09:27, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Potential error in the mechanism section

There is, I assume, meant to be a 'not' somewhere in this sentence?

"While blood-brain barrier disruption alone does appear to cause epileptogenesis, it has been correlated to increased seizure activity." 70.31.87.187 (talk) 03:25, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

"🫨" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect 🫨 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 8 § 🫨 until a consensus is reached. Duckmather (talk) 23:11, 8 February 2024 (UTC)