Misplaced Pages

Your GA nomination of Dyslexia

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Dyslexia you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Bluerasberry -- Bluerasberry (talk) 14:00, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 14:43, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Dyslexia

The article Dyslexia you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Dyslexia for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. DoctorJoeE /_{talk to me!} 15:23, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Dyslexia--Moxy (talk) 15:57, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 15:41, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

DYK for Dyslexia

thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 12:09, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

RE/ Misplaced Pages:Elsevier ScienceDirect results mostly out, but more to come? (wikiproject med)

You need to say clearly which option you are applying for, whether it is obvious or not. Wiki CRUK John (talk) 02:15, 9 January 2015 (UTC) Approved

you are correct,thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 09:11, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

RE/ FYI Complementary and Alternative Medicine(wikiproject med)

—Given that the remedy has just been enacted, I am providing this notice to everybody who has participated in the discussion on Jimbo Wales' talk page for their information. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:44, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

thank you, for informing me on this controversial med subject--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 17:16, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

west Africa/ebola

Hi Ozzie.. I think that Perhaps these 3 do need a little rearranging.. Guinea with the lowest cases, but the index case has to stay first, Sierra Leone second sounds good, with Liberia last Mostly because of the total case counts. The daily Case counts must be viewed cautiously, how many times has it happened that case counts slow, just before it resurfaces in a new region. Also i'm concerned about the 'Suspected case' counts that are still increasing, as well as the slowness of reports coming out of Liberia. Then again it wont move to "Contained" until WHO confirms... So I see no real problem with a little reshuffle.. _Gremlin 13:30, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

Just a quick note update.. Looking at latest released figures from Liberia.. Feb 28th http://www.mohsw.gov.lr/documents/Sitrep%20289%20Feb%2028th%202015.pdf - suspected:4354 Probable:1877 Confirmed:3149, and March 5th http://www.mohsw.gov.lr/documents/Sitrep%20294%20March%205th%202015.pdf suspected:4479 (+125) Probable:1879(+2) Confirmed:3149... thats 127 cases in 5 days. _Gremlin 11:14, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

I agree, thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 11:19, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

MEDDATE /(wikiproject med)

You cite MEDDATE in a lot of discussions, so I wanted to take a moment to clarify that "rule". It's meant to be a rule of thumb, rather than an absolute requirement. It doesn't say just "five years"; it says "five years or so", and those last two words matter. It also says that the rule was written for subjects that receive the most attention, like Hypertension, and not for rare diseases or other subjects that don't see much research attention.

What you really want is to consider the last few high-quality secondary sources, which (depending on the subject) might be professional-level books or review articles. We want to take advantage of what MEDDATE calls the "full review cycle": Alice published a review, Bob published a primary study, and Chris read both Alice's and Bob's papers and wrote a new review. If it took ten years to get through a full review cycle, then MEDDATE actually wants ten years, not five. Conversely, if you get three good review articles every month, then MEDDATE would rather than you used this year's or last year's best publications, instead of going back to anything that was no more than four years and 364 days old. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:13, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

your correct, thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 00:51, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Humans and the Environment

Hi Ozzie10aaaa. A notification came up that you asked me a question, but I then saw you reverted it so assumed you changed your mind. I only just now noticed that you asked it in another format. I know Jytdog gave an answer at WT:MED#Safety of genetically modified foods, but since that thread is getting quite long and relatively stale I though I would give my 2 cents here. Feel free to move it back there if you think that appropriate.

The interactions between GMOs and the environment then the environment and humans are complicated so a straight answer may be difficult. Some of the main environmental concerns covered at the controversies page are; insects developing resistance, horizontal gene transfer to other plants, death of non-target organisms, loss of biodiversity and secondary pests becoming more prominent. The effect of these on the environment are hard to accurately predict, let alone whether they will have any indirect effect on human health. Glyphosphate-resistant weeds resulting from gene flow are unlikely to develop outside of crops as they do not provide any selective advantage in the wild, but insect resistant ones might. Loss of biodiversity is a problem with all agriculture and so is the death of non-target organisms. Everything is interconnected in some way so I can't honestly say something occurring to environment through genetic engineering will never effect human health at some point. I feel that would be true for any technology though. Most people when thinking about human health and GM food are more concerned with the direct relationship. If I eat this will it be harmful to me. I think the article is better off distinguishing between the environment and human health the way it does.

You gave an example that increased pesticides used on GM crops may lead to increased risk of cancers. The theory being that GMO crops have increased pesticide use and high levels of pesticide are a risk factor for some cancers. Currently there are two main groups of GM crops on the market (Bt crops and glyphosphate resistant crops). Bt crops actually use less pesticide since they are modified to be insect resistant (so need less synthetic pesticide). The Bt toxin itself has been shown through multiple studies to be harmless to humans and even non-target insects. Glyphosphate is relatively safe to humans (see Glyphosate#Human toxicity) compared to other herbicides. Any chemical application is going to be regulated under various governmental acts designed to keep toxicity levels below a certain level and this will apply to all crops including GMO ones. You also have to take into account that most toxicity studies are done using straight round-up or a similar product, whereas in practice the final food product will at most have only residue of the chemical and in most cases virtually none of the pesticide will remain. Again all this is all regulated (with-holding periods and the like) and not unique to GMO.

Anyway, I am not trying to convince you to become a supporter GM. I don't even really know where you stand on the issue. I personally see huge potential and most of the risks as being speculative, especially those related to human health. I knew a group of researchers that were trying to put vaccines in bananas. One idea being that they could be used to vaccinate kids in regions with unreliable or no power. I think this factor and many other similar ones get overlooked and the discussion is dominated by Monsanto's involvement and much of the opposition is because of them. AIRcorn (talk) 05:07, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

RfC on GM food

Note about this RfC where you !voted. I tweaked the statement to make it more clear that it is about eating GM food and health. I'm notifying each person who !voted, in case that matters to you. Sorry for the trouble. Jytdog (talk) 21:49, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

this is an interesting topic. thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 10:18, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

(wikiproject med)/ (cover)

thank you (especially coming from you)--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 17:49, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

NP my friend!! . On a side note I noticed you edit Ebola articles...new book out Center For Disease Control; Francois Wilson (2014). CDC Guidance on Ebola Virus (EVD): 2014 Edition. International Publications Media Group. ISBN 978-1-63267-011-3. and..last month they also digitized Ebola Virus: New Insights for the Healthcare Professional: 2011 Edition: ScholarlyPaper. Scholarly Editions. 2012. ISBN 978-1-4649-1493-5. -- Moxy (talk) 17:56, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

your are the best!..thanks!--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 18:23, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you! (wikiproject med)

thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 15:14, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

It looks like you deserve that cup of coffee! I left a note on https://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Medicine#Disagreement_at_Psychosurgery_and_History_of_psychosurgery, thanking you as well for your note about my "valuable" opinion. If there is an emerging consensus perhaps it would be useful if you left a note under Talk:History of psychosurgery as well to prevent deletion of those useful references at least under that heading. Philipegalite (talk) 16:09, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

and thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 16:37, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

I also appreciate the way you tell people that you've commented on a discussion and encourage them to do the same. Please keep it up. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:54, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

thank you WhatamIdoing, --Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 15:42, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

for you!

Although we have not directly communicated with each other I have followed your diligent, fair and outstanding work towards making Misplaced Pages work in an otherwise unintelligible labyrinth. WikiProject Medicine is working at its best , better than formerly because of the team work you have promoted. I quit editing last year disappointed but you have tackled the same issue with more success and fairness. Stay vigilant for scholarship and justice! In the meantime have a cherry coke and a cheeseburger from me! Thank your for the vindication of my previous editing work! LeBassRobespierre (talk) 16:45, 17 May 2015 (UTC) |}

thank you --Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 17:14, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Waid's note.../ebola

Ozzie, I've had your page on my watch list because we work on the Ebola article together. I noticed that you deleted Waid's note. Was it by accident? I've known Waid for years and can hardly say how many times I've gone to her for advise. IMO, she's one of our best editors and I've never seen her to display the arrogance and lack of good intent that is not uncommon for this project. If she tried to help me I'd consider it an honor that she was willing to spend the time on me, a less experienced editor. Gandydancer (talk) 14:50, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

actually it was to place inline cites on articles that need it, which I will,(some individuals simply have a different way, though she is professional), ,,BTW now that I have your attention I wanted you to know its always been a pleasure to work with you (and I spoke with Brian he added some info to the article...he's OK), --Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 14:58, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

It's okay. I know he's thinking about it. There's no need to keep it visible. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:02, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

I thank you for any advise... thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 16:08, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Your work is appreciated!/(wikiproject med)

thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 21:30, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Liberia/ebola

"On the same day, the tree were the outbreak began, was identified." That reference is about Liberia, so should I move it out of the Guinea section? Art LaPella (talk) 16:29, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Art LaPella..Art its this ref and its in Guinea.thanks for checking I wish everyone were like you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 16:36, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Reedited. Art LaPella (talk) 16:46, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

thanks Art--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 16:50, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Can I barrow your thoughts? Comment /(wikiproject med)

I have been working on Stab wound for a little bit and I am working to get it up to GA status hopefully but I really am sort of limited in what else I can add. It is a very niche subject and I have juiced all my sources dry. If you have a moment would you mind taking a look at it and giving your input? Anything is valued. Peter.C • talk • contribs 14:20, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

absolutely, thank you for asking--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 15:13, 24 June 2015 (UTC)