User talk:FQ1513

Helminthic therapy regards... I appreciate the message! Indeed cost is my big concern. I'm thinking maybe trying Ovamed for a bit, and if it helps much, then investing in AutoimmuneTherapies treatment since I'd figure I'd have strong chance of success with it. In the meantime I'll likely be scouring the USA in search of hookworm infections (LOL) Peoplesunionpro 19:58, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Citation

I noticed your comment on Helminthic therapy asking for tips on making the citation process less tedious. This tool is something that I've found useful -- just select PubMed ID and type in the number, and you automatically get a properly formatted string. --Arcadian (talk) 14:47, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rheumatoid arthritis

I noticed your addition to the rheumatoid arthritis page. Unfortunately, I don't think we can mention helminthic therapy for RA unless there has been some significant research into it. Just because HT has been shown to confer some benefits in other autoimmune diseases does not automatically extend its evidence base into RA. To suggest that it "might be useful" is generally a violation of "no original research", one of our core content policies. Please contact me if you have further questions about this. JFW | T@lk 18:23, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the pointer on wiki protocol. Perhaps there is another way to insert the reference. Helminthic therapy modulates inflammation, RA is a disease of inflammation. If I had RA I would want to know about it. Given all that is there any way to insert a reference about HM into the RA page?FQ1513 (talk) 18:52, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be promoting helminthic therapy in a lot of articles. It doesn't really matter if you personally think you would want to know about a potential therapy, or if the idea is theoretically sound. The standard for inclusion in an encyclopedia article is that something is verifiable and notable, not that the idea exists. So (to give a completely unrelated example) if you went to school with the current President of the United States, and you saw him dance down the hallway between classes, then it does not get included, even though it's true and some people might want to know that. However, if you can produce a reputable newspaper that says he danced in the hallway, and a good reason why this matters to the world, then it's possible to include it.

Effective treatments are normally considered notable, so your primary task is providing a good, reputable, independent source that says it actually works for a specific disease. When you have a source in hand, THEN you can add this information. Until then, you can pretty much expect your additions to get deleted. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:31, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This paper cites RA as a candidate for helminthic therapy: http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/497015_2. Is that sufficient? The articles I am linking the Helminthic therapy page too all have to do with inflammation and for colitis, asthma, allergies, crohns and ms there is science that supports those links. I also, when such a section exists, put the link in places like Alternative therapies, Therapies being studied or researched, etc. I am not making grand claims that this is a cure all. But, if one reads the research it moderates or eliminates, depending on the individual, chronic inflammation. Since RA is a diseases, as I understand it, of chronic inflammation, it seems that there would be a place and good reason to mention it there. FQ1513 (talk) 19:41, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No. That study is not even close to good enough to justify inclusion in an RA article. First of all, it doesn't actually name RA as a candidate for this treatment. Here's the only mention of RA (page 2: I corrected your link): "Diseases associated with polarized Th1 responses include CD, multiple sclerosis, insulin-dependent diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, and psoriasis." The mere fact that RA gets mentioned in passing as an example of a disease involving this subclass of T cells is not reasonable proof that this is a potential treatment for RA.

The article is a reasonably good source for helminthic therapy related to IBD, but it doesn't go any further than that. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:09, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links

I have answered your question about why I deleted the links to a Yahoo! online support group and the helminthic therapy clinic in Tijuana, Mexico on my talk page. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:38, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Helminthic therapy providers

A tag has been placed on Helminthic therapy providers, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read our the guidelines on spam as well as the Wikipedia:Business' FAQ for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Gromlakh (talk) 00:51, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have deleted it according to your note. If you want to do articles about specific therapeuticals, be sure to include suitable references, preferably including authoritative govt sources & major peer reviewed journals--see the articles about other medicines. DGG (talk) 02:00, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ovamed

You are probably familiar with these guidelines, but in case you are not may I advise you, before you put too much effort into this article, to read WP:ORG, WP:ADVERT and WP:Business' FAQ. JohnCD (talk) 16:04, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doing it offline avoids the danger that a half-completed article may be nominated for deletion on the basis of (e.g.) not having enough references. Another thing you can do to protect a part-finished article is to put {{underconstruction}} at the top - that will protect it for a time, but if it is not edited for a week or so, the tag may be automatically removed. JohnCD (talk) 16:53, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alternately, you can work on it in your userspace (that is, any page beginning with User:FQ1513/... such as User:FQ1513/Sandbox), which I can help you with. That's what I do, I've got a skeletal one going in user:delldot/concussive convulsions, for example. delldot talk 22:08, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your note

Hi FQ151. Thanks so much for the kind note on Talk:Bacteria! It made me smile, it's always nice to get good feedback (not that I've been a big contributor to the article, but still). :-) Don't hesitate to leave me a message on my talk page if you have any questions or need anything, I'm always glad to help. Peace, delldot talk 22:08, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple sclerosis

I have eliminated your ref for helminthic therapy. Reasons are as follow: To say "has been demonstrated to provide benefits for the relapsing remitting form of the disease" a clinical trial should have been done; which as far as I known has not been done. The only article I know of is PMID 17230481 which is a study which concludes that MS is less agressive in the group of infected patients than in the non infected. That does not prove a causal relationship; there could be many other non controlled explanations for the groups difference. This said; your sentence has no place in the main article per WP:Weight. However it already was present in the secondary article on treatments which is also a FA under the treatments under investigation section. It cited the PMID I have just given you; and I have added the one you provided. Bests regards.--Garrondo (talk) 14:47, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No problems. Equilibrium in content in WP medical articles is tough. Have you taken a look at WP:MEDMOS and WP:MEDRS. Their following is mandatory and anyway from my point of view, they are quite sensible and of much use even when I write outside wikipedia. If you have any doubts you can ask me or in the medicine project (WP:MED). Best regards.

Hello, FQ1513. You have new messages at Delicious carbuncle's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Re Arthropod

Many thanks for Talk:Arthropod#thank_you_so_much. There's nothing wrong with expressing appreciation for articles. It's a pleasure to get a straight "thank you" when so many of the Talk posts on many articles are from people who know a lot less than they think or are aggressively pushing their own points of view. So if you see other articles you really enjoy and / or find useful, go ahead and thank their editors - I've done it occasionally and should probably do it more often.

Please let me know if I can help you on WP any time - my user page shows my main interests, I also review articles for promotion to GA status (the ones I've passed as GA are listed on my page), and it seems I know a little more about page layout techniques than most editors. --Philcha (talk) 07:32, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge discussion for Immunomodulation_therapy

An article that you have been involved in editing, Immunomodulation_therapy, has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Scray (talk) 05:41, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:42, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]