Jump to content

User talk:Doc James/Archive 30

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 25←Archive 28Archive 29Archive 30Archive 31Archive 32→Archive 35

The Signpost: 21 May 2012

Question

Please also check orexin and its very first source. Could you explain why the source is permitted on orexin and not permitted on migraine. I'm new to this. I'm also shocked to learn that Handbook of Behavior, Food and Nutrition is presumptively not scholarly or peer reviewed. Thanks for the tips. Happy editing. Bostonfiasco (talk) 06:53, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Sure. Wikipedia currently contains many pages that need improvement. If you wish to see example of what we are aiming for check out articles like dengue fever. Just because one article contains poor sourcing does not mean we should add these type of sources to other articles.
With respect to "Handbook of Behavior, Food and Nutrition" where was it stated that this source could not be used? --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:57, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Well, now I'm extremely confused. How are the Federally Registered (FDA) Clinical Trials not a primary source which can be stated in a section titled "research." Isn't' there a distinction between primary source and secondary (peer reviewed and reputable). Aren't clinical trials the raw data (primary source) for future scholarly articles (perhaps even raw data for wikipedia)? In fact, persons with migraines might greatly benefit knowing exactly what clinical trials are out there, and have a link directly to them. A section titled "research" should include, at minimum, links to currently ongoing clinical trials (federally approved) - trials which are scrutinized by several scholars and the government, and will undergo further peer review during and after clinical trials. Part of the reason the "research" section of migraine is tiny may be because cutting edge research (Jan. 2012) naturally predates peer reviews journals...sometimes by 5 or more years. Just so I'm clear, it is not ok or sufficient to cite to an actual clinical trial merely to show that a trial exists; rather, one must wait till a journal publishes an article that mentions the clinical trial before one can provide a reference to that trial. Thanks for your help. Bostonfiasco (talk) 07:17, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

We do NOT typically use primary sources but rather use secondary sources per WP:MEDRS. A phase 2 trial is simply not notable. If you look at the research section of dengue fever Dengue_fever#Research you will note that it is supported by secondary sources. So yes we wait until a review articles discusses the primary research (ie. sometime deems it sufficiently notable) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:25, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Oh, I think I'm understanding you. Really I think we are talking about the same things. I agree that peer reviewed work is best. That said, could "Research" contain a subsection of current clinical trials: identifying what they are testing (device, drug, dietary supplement,...), and for which specific conditions the trials are considering, and the phase. Bostonfiasco (talk) 07:59, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Review articles are almost always peer reviewed but peer reviewed articles are not always review articles. With respect to adding lists of current clinical trials maybe on a subpage (see as an example cancer and cancer research as the subpage). Might be good to request further feedback from a larger group here WT:MED Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:11, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Good Work Doc

Dear Brother, I really like your contributions and work highly appreciated, thanks for being with us and keep in touch bro, just wanted to appreciate your work --Faizanalivarya (talk) 17:44, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I am planning on coming to Pakistan one day. I have friends who have been and they say it is not only beautiful but the people are exceedingly friendly. --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:19, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Gulf War syndrome mediation

Would you please help mediate per Talk:Gulf War syndrome#Mediation request or help find someone from WikiProject Medicine who is willing to do so? 71.212.246.55 (talk) 15:32, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Will take a look in a couple of days. Just got home. --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:12, 24 May 2012 (UTC)


Your GA nomination of Gastroenteritis

The article Gastroenteritis you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Gastroenteritis for things which need to be addressed. GoPTCN 15:45, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Great will take a look shortly. --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:33, 25 May 2012 (UTC)


Your GA nomination of Gastroenteritis

The article Gastroenteritis you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Gastroenteritis for comments about the article. Well done! There is a backlog of articles waiting for review, why not help out and review a nominated article yourself? GoPTCN 11:09, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 May 2012

WP:CONFLICT Wikipedia: NOTYOURS

Hello,

Looking at the page history circumcision and discussions, I saw that you have many times helped. And you seem to be moderate in your positions! But there are big problems on the page circumcision...

Particularly, the rules are not followed by user:Jakew :


WP:CONFLICT He has just published a study with Brian Morris proposing to Asian (and especially Chinese and Japanese) the establishment of the U.S. practice of routine circumcision : http://www.nature.com/aja/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/aja201247a.html


Wikipedia: NOTYOURS

http://toolserver.org/~daniel/WikiSense/Contributors.php?wikilang=en&wikifam=.wikipedia.org&grouped=on&page=Circumcision

Why the rules are not enforced on this page? I think that contributors should not be activists (pro or anti) but all the members of the WikiProject Medicine... This article needs you ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suwq Ede (talk • contribs) 00:11, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Medicine translation effort

Hi, saw your message and I contacted Ildiko. Interested in the role of integrating the articles back to hu.wiki, feel free to put me into contact with the TWB folks. I'm also interested in the translation itself, so just let me know. Have a nice day! --Viktorhauk (talk) 09:12, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Wonderful. Email me. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 09:18, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Cochrane

Hi James. Since you've commented on the wording used to describe the Cochrane report, I wonder if you'd offer your thoughts on Zad68's proposed compromise in Talk:Circumcision#Citing Cochrane? Thanks, Jakew (talk) 09:52, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

My position is we should just state the facts. His is an okay compromise.--Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:37, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Recent ADHD additions

Just wanted to let you know that the same recent addition by Destinero that you re-reverted on the ADHD article has also been made in the Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder controversies article. It seems to me that it is probably inappropriate here too, but I wanted some input from someone more experienced than me.

Thanks in advance. Watermelon mang (talk) 11:58, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

I am willing to give more lee way in the "controversies article". My main issue in the main article is that the main article is an overview and this was undue weight. Feel free to summarize it further. The person whom the quote is from is a well known champion of ADHD and his position is not surprising. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 15:33, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Regarding primary sources of medical claims

Hi! I am attempting to edit some articles on food products and other supplements with medical claims and I've come across a major problem. A ridiculous amount rely on primary sources. See pomegranate juice for an example. Often the lead will be accurate, but the body will use primary sources in order to support claims.The supplement and fortified food business is a billion dollar industry and it's too easy for the promoters to use Wikipedia to their advantage. I know according to policy I have every right to strip these articles of these sources but I don't want to get into any edit wars over it. Your thoughts? Ultra Venia (talk) 19:20, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes we need to use secondary sources. Please remove the primary sources and content they support unless you can find secondary sources that support the content in question. Drop me a note if you encounter problems. I aggressively remove poor quality content / sources all the time and we need more people who are willing to do so.--Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:04, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Section

Hi, Doc James, I am a California patient with a Kaiser Permanente HMO insurance plan. Doctors still could not diagnose why I am losing muscle mass. Please I need your insight, I can't die yet, I need to help out my mother and sister financially. :( I'm only 27, male. I've been having a very rapid muscle wasting symptom in my entire body, it has now affected my eyesight. Muscles in my face have no tone now, my tongue has atrophied, my tonsils, the opening behind my tonsils, my arms, legs, everywhere. I feel like it is metabolic in nature. THey've checked virtually everything, abdominal CT + ultrasound, hormones, hiv. hepa a/b/c, all came out normal except for:

  • - proteinuria (not enough to diagnose nephrotic syndrome, only around 196-200 mg/ 24 hours protein)
  • - very low vitamin d levels 10 (normal range 25-70) my endo kinda gave up on me and said this is the only thing she knows could be causing it (normal free t4, normal tsh, had a cushing test, no cushing either)
  • - slightly elevated alt enzyme 60 (normal <40)
  • - 60 lbs overweight which is situated in the abdominal region, skinny arms. Internist said Low vit D may have caused this. I eat a low calorie Mediterranean/Zone diet so it is unexpected.
  • - tachycardia, high bp (all suspected to be from anxiety, last ekg normal)
  • - gynecomastia which came before the belly fat.
  • - diffuse overall body hair loss which began before I noticed muscle wasting

If I can share also, I took these supplements, could any of these have caused my muscle wasting?

  • # Vitex (chasteberry) I took circa 2005-2007 to treat my acne
  • # Pancreatin enzyme I took for a long time thinking it would help me digest meals that contain dairy. I react badly to dairy similar to appendicitis.
  • # D-Ribose I took in 2009 which was the supplement I took right before I noticed the foamy urine/proteinuria. I probably OD'd that one time since I didn't eat enough when I took it that day. APparently it also may cause hypoglycemia. My most recent fasting glucose is normal 70 (60-100). Could I be having hyperinsulinemia? Can hyperinsulinemia cause muscle wasting?
  • # Calcium d-glucarate I took in 2011 right before I noticed the rapid onset of muscle wasting. Muscle wasting I noticed rapidly happening around 9/2011. I took this for the breast tissue enlargement I've been noticing.
  • # Low dose anastrozole I took at 10/2011 also right around the time I noticed the rapid muscle wasting. took a very low dose 0.25mg every other day for a month.

Is there something I can do aside from muscle training, taking whey protein + OKG to stop muscle wasting regardless of the cause? Please help me make this stop :((( I can't leave my mother, our dad walked out on us I'm trying to fill his shoes :'(( — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.84.6.163 (talk) 05:11, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

It sounds like you are having a great deal of difficulties. I am however not in a position where I can give advice over the internet even if I knew what was wrong. It appears that your doctors have worked you up very well and I recommend you follow up with them if things do not improve. Hope things turn out well.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:21, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Ref

Gupta, Priya (2012). Understanding and Management of Special Child in Pediatric Dentistry. JP Medical Ltd, 2012. p. 264. ISBN 9350256312. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:46, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

See also

You moved the portal link for underwater diving from See also to external links in Drowning with the comment "we do not typically use See also". I refer you to the Manual of style, section See also where it is specified that the usual place for a portal link is the See also section. Portal links are not external links. Peter (Southwood) (talk): 16:39, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Per WP:MEDMOS we do not typically use see also sections. As see this an an extension of not be a collection of links. Cheers Doc James (talk ·contribs · email) 16:42, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't get your second sentence, and I can't find anything on MEDMOS about not using See also sections, perhaps you could be more specific. Cheers Peter (Southwood) (talk): 17:20, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Sure in the exact text is here Wikipedia:MEDMOS#Standard_appendices "Avoid the See also section when possible; prefer wikilinks in the main article and navigation templates at the end." If you look at most of our medical GAs and FAs they do not have this section. --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:31, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, it is now clear, but it leaves the proper place for a portal link for a medical article undefined. I have changed it to a portal bar link and placed it directly above the navbars as a suggestion, but below the navbars might be as good or better. I leave that to your discretion, and will make changes to all the medical articles in the underwater diving portal once you have decided. I will leave it a few days in case anyone else wants to express an opinion. Cheers, Peter (Southwood) (talk): 18:56, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
To Jmh649 (Doc James), for acting against plagiarism of Wikipedia's articles. Axl ¤ [Talk] 21:00, 4 June 2012 (UTC)


I have given you two "Defender of the Wiki" barnstars in the past. Bit of a theme there.... Best wishes. Axl ¤ [Talk] 21:00, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:01, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

A new test for detecting active pulmonary TB

Dear Dr. James Heilman,

I was wondering if the information regarding a new test for detecting active pulmonary tuberculosis recently published in "Tuberculosis" journal is worthy to report under the main article "Tuberculosis" or "Tuberculosis diagnosis" on Wikipedia.

Following is the summary of that information that can be included in one of the above articles if you approve.

Mycobacterium tuberculosis bacteria which cause TB produce Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs). Such volatile compounds and their metabolites are normally present in the breath have been evaluated to be used as a rapid point-of-care breath test (REF) in patients with active pulmonary TB.

Reference: Michael Phillipsemail,Jaime Blaisemail, Graham Bothamleyemail, Anirudh Chaturvediemail, Kinjal D. Modiemail, Mauli Pandyaemail, Maria Piedad R. Natividademail, Urvish Patelemail, Nagsen N. Ramrajeemail, Peter Schmittemail, Zarir F. Udwadiaemail (2012). "Point-of-care breath test for biomarkers of active pulmonary tuberculosis". Tuberculosis, 31 May 2012. DOI:10.1016/j.tube.2012.04.002. PII: S1472-9792(12)00079-0.

Thanks for your help!!!

Sangeethoney (talk) 04:37, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Sangeethoney

We typically wait until a secondary source put this primary research finding in appropriate light before commenting on it here. An interesting finding but not ready yet.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:51, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 04 June 2012

Alprazolam

You have updated the info (not 1st line treatment bc. ssris) with a review article from Australia, w.o. limiting the scope of this update to Australia. It is however a review of the Australian standards. This is confusing. As you know the views are differing between countries e.g. UK and US and Australia. I think we will be unable to resolve or unify these differences, so we are imo held to handle this by country w.o. generalizations. What do you think? agree? 70.137.154.253 (talk) 10:08, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Did you read the whole paper? Does anyone still recommend benzos as a first line treatment for panic disorder? It is not just a review of Australian standards but also looked at a number of other countries including the UK (NICE), America and the World Federation. A good source. We would need a recent source that says different before we will need to split it up as you mention. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 10:15, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Well the Aussies have some of their own problems with benzos in general, as you know from e.g. temazepam. Along the lines of the Beer ad "how to speak Australian" (do you watch TV) the Aussies are somewhat into an effect, resembling huffing from an old rag with gasoline, if you see what I mean. Next to the Brits nobody else is as hysterical w. benzos and their dangers at all, if you do not count Brunei and some Asian countries where you get hanged or decapitated for a few goof balls, and maybe some Scandinavians. It is a mentality thing, them guys also need a prohibition for Alc and are hysterical about it as well, think Systembolaget. So these views are not universal, it seems to have to do with the common attitude of a country towards alcohol too. These things are a little bit exchangable, as you see from Brunei and Scandinavia. I believe in Brunei you get 100 on the foot soles for drinking.(with a 6 ft bamboo stick) In contrast e.g. in Spain nobody gives a shit, and nobody would switch the good brandy against some goof balls on free will.(probably I am exaggerating)

Yes everything ok here, but lousy times.(no work for long time) 70.137.154.253 (talk) 10:36, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Never watch TV. Do not even own the thing. I have been working a huge amount on this effort here http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Wikipedia:MED/Translation_project Would love your help if you have time. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:13, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Re the TV, very reasonable advice, but again a cultural issue. In the US TV is essential to 1. see if the Zombies are coming 2. see if the Russians are coming 3. see if the Terrorists are coming. 4. see if the "Rapture" is coming where everybody "righteous" sprouts little wings, throws off the genitalia and rises "ziiiuuuu..." to heaven, like a rocket - no kidding, you can't imagine. 5. see if the president nuked some country 6. see if the stocks collapsed and all over the place bankers are jumping from the high-rises and dangling from the trees etc. etc. etc. (I don't find that normal either, but I am an immigrant and the US 'mericans are as mad as a box of frogs.) Is Canada different? never been there, but must be swell such an empty country, thats one notch up from the US, compared to crowded Europe. 70.137.154.253 (talk) 11:47, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the graphic pictures! By the way what sort of work are you looking for? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:56, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Electrical engineering - systems architecture, algorithms, electronic security, instruction set architecture, cryptography, mathematical issues in electronics and the like. Difficult to find as I am literally old fart, and the people are into juvenile-mania. The average middle management already looks like an MTV spoof, all clapping their hands at every second sentence (during their power-point presentations) with elasto-dynamic vigor, to appear youthful and optimistic. Its really box of frogs. They probably all got training classes for vacuum salesmen, as the formula / mantra is now customer-orientation.

Any ideas? 70.137.154.253 (talk) 00:27, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Do they have this ageism in the healthcare professions too? At least in the US it is very difficult to find a job at age 55-65 in the high tech / electronics industry. They dream of the inventive genius kids, not old farts. Thats why middle management looks like an MTV spoof. Is this only a US problem? High tech industry problem? 70.137.154.253 (talk) 07:56, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

In health care MDs practice into their 80s. Many move from clinical practice to admin work or work only part time. I probably spend as much time volunteering here though as I do working. Are you interested in working on medical content besides articles on benzos? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 08:03, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

I have worked on other content as well, also chemistry. Look at my edit history. What I can do is pretty much the same elementary thing, regardless - namely taking care that the sources are appropriate, cited correctly, mentioning species and material in case of primary sources, check for transcription errors and plausibility etc. The benzos are not my pet peeve, I just stumbled on some benzo articles which were totally outrageous at that time and started moving this from "sensational press style" to "reasonable scientific writing", thats how I ended up cleaning up benzo articles.(At that time temazepam was a secret torture drug of the KGB, mainly prescibed by criminal and reckless doctors on the payroll of the mafia, mainly found in the pockets of Glasgow criminals in the morgue, causing immediately side effects of instantaneous heroin-like addiction, testicular shrinkage and soon after cancer - if you followed the Wiki article.)

So regarding the healthcare professions, it seems as if the high tech professionals are in a particularly bad situation compared to the normal circumstances in other professions. They almost became academic day laborers as a result of the globalization of industry, without any job security. There is no *local* demand for them, in principle you can do the R&D wherever there are enough appropriately educated people, it makes no difference except for the wages, and this is what counts. This is of course different from the job of a doctor. 70.137.154.253 (talk) 08:52, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

You interest in working on this project? [1] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:29, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Doc James. You have new messages at Talk:Cancer_pain/GA2.
Message added 13:16, 5 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Some changes have been done in response to the GA review so far; could you take a look? Thanks! Allens (talk | contribs) 13:16, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

DVT

I have undertaken the GA review of Deep vein thrombosis. I would be glad of your input with regard to a point I have raised on the use of the abbreviation DVT. You can see my comment at the review page. Thank you in advance for your help. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:35, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Michael F. Holick - 25-OH-Vitamin D

Hello DocJames, the 25OH-Vitamin D level is not meassured routinely in all patients, but it's routinely meassured TO DETERMINE A PATIENT'S VITAMIN D STATUS; but you're right, the references were not correct, I put the 1972 reference directly behind the information that he identified 25-OH-Vitamin D and added another citation which supports the statement, that 25-OH-Vitamin D is routinely meassured to asses the vitamin d status. Thanks for that hint. --Matthias3110 (talk) 19:24, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

As "routinely" sounded ambigous in that context, I used different words to describe, that 25-OH-vitamin D is the vitamin d metabolite that is meassured to assess the nutritional status.

PS: Let me know if there are further aspects of the article should be improved. Thanks for your help. --Matthias3110 (talk) 19:24, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Was just commenting on this edit [2] Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:50, 7 June 2012 (UTC)


Dear Doc James, as you're obviously also in the field of medicine I think it's great you're having an eye on the vitamin D article (which definitely needs to be improved). In my opinion a vitamin D article definitely needs to refer to Michael F. Holick as he identified the major vitamin D metabolites, developed vitamin d assays, vitamin d absorption tests etc. This guy has been doing research in the field of vitamin d for several decades, has hundreds of publications and contributed significantly to science. That's why I want to refer to him in the context of calcitriol as he both identified and chemically synthized calcitriol. That achievement deserves to be honored by a reference to his wikipedia article. Thanks! Best regards --Matthias3110 (talk) 23:29, 7 June 2012 (UTC)


Ok, I see that refering to Michael F. Holick once is considered sufficient. The idea with the history section is good, alternatively there could be a sentence after the explainaitions of both calcidiol and calcitriol which refers to Dr. Holick. I simply think he should be mentioned in the context of vitamin d, especially as he identified these metabolites. That definitely should be mentioned, such as Robert Koch is also mentioned when talking about tuberculosis. --Matthias3110 (talk) 23:36, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Requested articles

Yes I took some time getting our disease related articles under control. Most of the requests should 1) not exist 2) are simply redirects. --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:21, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Cancer pain/GA2

Hi James. If I email you, would you be able to send me a copy of these articles that you highlighted on the GA review? I don't have access to those journals.

  • Porter, LS; Keefe, FJ (2011 Aug). "Psychosocial issues in cancer pain." Current pain and headache reports 15 (4): 263-70. PMID 21400251.
  • Sheinfeld Gorin, S; Krebs, P, Badr, H, Janke, EA, Jim, HS, Spring, B, Mohr, DC, Berendsen, MA, Jacobsen, PB (2012 Feb 10). "Meta-analysis of psychosocial interventions to reduce pain in patients with cancer." Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology 30 (5): 539-47. PMID 22253460.

Thank you for finding them, by the way. They look perfect for the article. --Anthonyhcole (talk) 10:23, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Omega-3 fatty acid (Cardiovascular disease)

Hello. I think the sentence, "Evidence does not support a beneficial role for omega-3 fatty acid supplementation in preventing cardiovascular disease or stroke," is not compatible with the study that it cites. I looked at the referenced study. It focuses on SECONDARY prevention - patients who have a history of CVD. I changed the sentence to reflect that. I think the previous version was implying PRIMARY prevention. MaxS 33 (talk) 16:16, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

sources

I don't understand what you mean/want. I have found studies of the facts I use. I don't see where the Wikipedia:MEDRS forbid use of the sources of the kind that I have found. Please point me to the basis of your deletions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.179.224.214 (talk) 16:18, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

You will be blocked if you continue to edit war poor quality content into this article. The refs you are using do not support the content in question. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:39, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

In my view, you delete without providing sufficient explanations. Without marking facts requiring refs, and without providing sufficient time for other editors to respond to the (not given) marks. Do you think that your opinion mater more than others, and that you need not explain it to any one because you are always correct? Do you think that it is not possible that any one would know better than you? About your threat to ban, please provide me with more information with regard to such process, so that I would be able to contemplate which one of us would be banned, in case that such a process would occur. Regard.

Peace

You will be blocked if you continue to edit war poor quality content into this article. The refs you are using do not support the content in question. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:39, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

In my view, you delete without providing sufficient explanations. Without marking facts requiring refs, and without providing sufficient time for other editors to respond to the (not given) marks. Do you think that your opinion mater more than others, and that you need not explain it to any one because you are always correct? Do you think that it is not possible that any one would know better than you? About your threat to ban, please provide me with more information with regard to such process, so that I would be able to contemplate which one of us would be banned, in case that such a process would occur. Regard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.179.224.214 (talk) 21:10, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

Technical quibble; a block is temporary, usually 24 hours for a first time block; a ban is more long-term and usually indefinite.--MrADHD | T@1k? 00:03, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
How is it decided who would be blocked/banned? PS. Mr DocJames, I have answered your question at the article's talk page about mSv. Assuming that you are a doctor and care for your patient's health, I suggest that we would work together to bring the information to the public, because the information is legit. I ask you to publish the information as was, until we would finish the process. 79.179.224.214 (talk) 00:26, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Your Refs next to mgy=msv doesn't work

Your refs next to mgy=msv doesn't work. Bad link. Btw, mSv=mGy only if the whole body is irradiated with X-rays, otherwise mSv!=mGy in most cases. Pitty that you edit thing you don't understand without consultation. How about chatting on IRC? You can find me as alex at http://webchat.freenode.net/ join room wikipedia. 79.179.224.214 (talk) 01:25, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks and fixed it. --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 01:36, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Left you a message on talk page of CT

Left you a message on talk page of CT — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.179.224.214 (talk) 01:48, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

dispute

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is "X-ray computed tomography". Thank you. --79.179.224.214 (talk) 04:12, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

What sort of references should be used is not up for dispute. It is already consensus.--Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:29, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
I am drawing your attention to my requst for you to prove that only ideal refs can be used.79.179.224.214 (talk) 18:16, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

USDA and obesity.

My first choice was to use a paper commissioned by the USDA and explained by them. This is because the fact that the USDA is feeding fat people is not so interesting in itself. I think it is more interesting that the USDA knows that they are feeding the fat, and all they have to say about it is, "The problem is just too complicated." After some thought, I have realized that this might be more relevant to "obesity in the US". Am I the only one who thinks it is insane that in the US, the lead agency for nutrition policy is the Department of Agriculture rather than the Department of Health? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniel Kellis (talk • contribs) 19:56, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

I would agree that the problem is complicated. Before it is mentioned within the main obesity article we need to have a good secondary source.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:38, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Vandal?

Hey Doc: Hope you and yours are well. FYI, I rolled back a suspicious IP edit at pancreatic cancer this morning because it seemed "stinky" (the only contribution of an IP editor, pointing to a website, no Talk page created, site didn't seem to add anything IMO). Please take a look when you get 14.27 free seconds ;-) Thanks for all you do my friend - VERY studly.

Your #1 fan: Cliff (a/k/a "Uploadvirus") (talk) 11:21, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Agree completely good call. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:27, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
Wow, Doc - thanks so much for your words and the gesture of kindness. Always great to work with you shoulder to shoulder. Now ... BACK AT IT :-)
Cliff (a/k/a "Uploadvirus") (talk) 11:56, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 June 2012

RE: Plagiarism of Articles

Some of my writing has also been directly plagiarized via copy and paste without attribution on at least two occasions in articles recently published in peer-reviewed oncology journals vis-a-vis lung cancer variants. See my User Page for cites and details. Best: Cliff (a/k/a "Uploadvirus") (talk) 01:48, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

As I looked again just now at those site, I (incredibly ironically) discovered that I seem to have stolen one of my quotes therein from YOUR user page without giving YOU any credit. MEA CULPA!!! LMAO!!! Cliff (a/k/a "Uploadvirus") (talk) 01:53, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes it is an exceedingly common problem. And this story only deals with the tip of the iceberg. --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:30, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Vaccination edit

Why have you deleted this ?

Wakefield has rebutted the allegations against himself on CNN's Anderson Cooper 360° news show [1] Wakefield's research has been replicated successfully nine times [2]

Would you prefer i link to each study directly ?

Further more , why have you deleted Wakefield's rebuttal ?

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.67.10.106 (talk) 13:34, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Have explained on your talk page. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 13:39, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Never mind. Totally disgusted with Wikipedia.

Translation from English to Croatian

Hello, I hope I understood everything correctly and contacted the right person for the right thing. I'd like to help translating health information from English to Croatian. I'm a medical student in Croatia, planning to move to UK in 3 years, so I'm proficient in both english and croatian medical terms.

Thank you for your time, Jellyfishlover — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jellyfishlover (talk • contribs) 18:56, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Excellent looking forwards to working together. --Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:40, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Diabetes

Hi, thanks for the information I was in fact thinking how to formulate the sentence. Why, btw, did you not use the "person with diabetes" language in your edit? Cheers, --Dailycare (talk) 18:59, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

I felt it was implied. You can if you wish though.--Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:21, 13 June 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Wikiquette Assistance discussion

Hello, Jmh649. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Wikiquette assistance regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

Yes you are required to use proper sources. Going through the entire dispute resolution process is not going to change that. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 07:40, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for References Heads Up

Good to have the link to WP:MEDRS. --Nicely0Done (talk) 17:22, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 June 2012

Mediation question

Please express an opinion on this reversion which was made without discussion on the talk page. 75.166.206.120 (talk) 22:30, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Would need to look into it further. On a quick look however the previous sources should be balanced with the new ones.Doc James (talk · contribs · email)(please leave replies on my talk page) 23:19, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
Would avoiding non-quantitative characterizations such as "modest" and "strong" be acceptable? 75.166.206.120 (talk) 05:09, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
Never mind. I am happy with including it in the intro and birth defects section in the manner it had been included before for balance. 71.212.226.91 (talk) 18:49, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Would you please express an opinion on [3] at Talk:Gulf War syndrome? 71.212.226.91 (talk) 06:41, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

  1. ^ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6kOxkPJfRM
  2. ^ http://www.ageofautism.com/2010/05/peer-reviewed-papers-support-findings.html
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Doc_James/Archive_30&oldid=1075200423"