Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:25, 25 August 2008

I am a Canadian Physician

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Doc James, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page.

This user page is currently inactive and is retained for historical reference. If you want to revive discussion regarding the subject, you might try contacting the user in question or seeking broader input via a forum such as the village pump.

If you are interested in medicine-related themes, you may want to visit the Medicine Portal.
If you are interested in improving medicine-related articles, you may want to join WikiProject Medicine (sign up here or say hello here).

Again, welcome!  JFW | T@lk 18:37, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Obesity

Thanks for your comments on Talk:Obesity and your message on my talkpage. I must say I had some difficulty following some of your comments (probably due to the formatting), but I'm sure that will sort itself out.

The reason you cannot presently edit obesity is quite simple: it is semi-protected. This will stop random people continuously vandalising the article with messages like "My teacher Mrs Jones is the fattest pesron in the wurld LOL 1!" Unfortunately, these edits vastly outstrip the number of constructive edits received from anonymous and brand-new accounts. Your account will be autoconfirmed after a few days and a number of constructive edits elsewhere on Misplaced Pages. Once this is the case, you are free to edit the article.

My view is that the obesity article is presently the right size and should not be expanded much more. Rather, existing content needs to be improved and supported with high-quality references (outline on reliable medical sources). If there is sufficient reason, it may be necessary to split off subarticles (e.g. medical consequences of obesity), but only if truly necessary. JFW | T@lk 18:37, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi,

you seem to be familiar with medical literature. If you use Pubmed, you can copy-past the PMID number at the bottom of the abstract entry into diberri's tool to automatically generate properly formatted references.

Let me know if you need any help.

cheers, --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 18:24, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Obesity again

Thanks for your expansion of obesity. I need to point out a few things before you carry on. Firstly, please familiarise yourself with the manual of style. For instance, in the header "Sedentary Lifestyle" the word "lifestyle" should be lowercase.

More importantly, please make no further edits to the article until you have looked at WP:CITE and we way references are formatted. Before you started, most references were formatted with the {{cite journal}} template, which standardises the references and gives rapid access to online versions of journal articles through PubMed and DOI. Stevenfruitsmaak (above) has provided a link to a tool that rapidly generates template code. It is easy to use. Simply adding bare URLs or unformatted text is not really acceptable. I will try to tidy up as much as I can. JFW | T@lk 19:22, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I have now fixed all the references. You are free to have a look at the page history to see what changes have been made.

I specifically dropped the citations to mortality studies from the introduction. Ideally, Misplaced Pages articles should be sourced to review articles and other secondary sources. The Lancet review by James and Haslam does a fine job at discussing shortened life expectancy in obesity, so I simply used that as a reference. Have a look at WP:MEDRS, the medical sources guideline.

Let me know if you need a hand with anything. JFW | T@lk 09:12, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Secondary sources are really more ideal than primary ones. For a full explanation you'd be better off looking at WP:MEDRS. Reviews (especially systematic reviews) do a better job at distinguishing between important and less important primary research.

I would really discourage plainly removing information like the citation to Quetelet's studies in the 19th century. This is an encyclopedia and not a scientific publication, and while in the New England Journal of Medicine such a citation would be out of place, it is definitely acceptable here and should probably be retained. JFW | T@lk 16:09, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Where systematic reviews are not available, WP:MEDRS has a list of other suitable sources. There are definitely exceptions to all those rules.

I'm not sure what you mean by "subsection". If you mean a separate article, then we'd better discuss this on Talk:Obesity so other contributors will be able to weigh in. Tonight I will try to change the bulleted list of complications into a table (prettier and easier to navigate). I have no objections against dedicated sections for mortality and on the "obesity paradox", provided adequate sources are available to populate such sections. JFW | T@lk 16:52, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Misplaced Pages pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 17:40, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Images

There is no Misplaced Pages policy on images from clinical practice. There are two separate issues: copyright and patient consent. There's an ongoing discussion about the level of care needed when publishing images of patients or their results. I personally think that completely anonymised data (i.e. an X-ray with the personal data removed) is impossible to trace, and all you will need is an idea whether the owner of the image agrees for it to be released under the WP:GFDL. This is probably your employer. In my mind, very few hospitals will object to their staff using anonymised patients' imaging for illustrative purposes in publications, and that would normally extend to Misplaced Pages. That's the copyright side of things. Then there's patient consent. I would personally obtain written consent from a patient if they were identifiable from the image. Some users have been more careful, and have signed written consent from their patients on file even if the image in question is untraceable (i.e. endoscopy stills).

Thanks ever so much for your continued work on obesity. You'll find me trying to expand it, and I may end up reshuffling and rephrasing some things that you've added. Bear with me. I'm an old hand and I think we share the conviction that the article can be improved to very high quality. JFW | T@lk 18:56, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

With regards to images from WHO and NIH publications - if they are truly public domain then there are no restrictions at all. But the situation may be more complex: see Misplaced Pages:Image use policy for details. JFW | T@lk 19:04, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm certain Mr Uptodate will object if you post his images on Misplaced Pages. However, a version redrawn by yourself might get Jeff Drazen annoyed. Suggest you ask Misplaced Pages:Media copyright questions - responses are gratifyingly quick. JFW | T@lk 01:56, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Spelling and grammar

Could I encourage you to pay some attention to your spelling and grammar. On obesity I have had to correct quite a few spelling mistakes and grammatical errors. JFW | T@lk 02:46, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Mozilla Firefox has an inbuilt spellchecker, but it doesn't do grammar. On Misplaced Pages, bots (automated scripts) occasionally correct frequently made errors, but that process is slow. JFW | T@lk 02:52, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

It is always "weight loss" and never "weight lose". I've had to correct this error a couple of times now. JFW | T@lk 18:16, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Image at juggling

Hello, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! I never managed to do more than flash five (once), but I was pretty good at three-ball "penguin" once upon a time. I'm glad that you've showed up at Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Medicine and hope that you'll stick around. I think WPMED is one of the most interesting groups on Misplaced Pages -- a lot of experienced editors (I see a couple of them have already found your talk page!) and everyone interested in a high-quality product. Thanks again for your contributions! WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:22, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

As a side note, free images you upload will be moved to Wikimedia Commons, whereas fair use images belong on Misplaced Pages. See Misplaced Pages:Wikimedia Commons. --Steven Fruitsmaak (Reply) 13:10, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Use of primary research

I removed the reference to a primary research study with a good reason, so unless that reason is addressed I don't think I can agree to reinsert it. WP:MEDRS, our sources guideline for medical articles, discourages primary research study barring very specific exceptions. All important reasons are listed there, so I will not rehash them. In this particular example, there might be various reasons why the study results might not be generalisable for the point you wanted to make (e.g. ethnic differences in metabolism leading to brisk weight response to aerobic exercise). JFW | T@lk 22:17, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Removing content

I have already explained why I removed the Singapore recruits content. You are using it to offer an example, yet we cannot know if that is a representative example. Has that study been cited in secondary sources? How about citing the secondary source? You must again familiarise yourself with WP:MEDRS, because that is the crux; it is not an empty issue. There are (as I indicated on Talk:Obesity) various reasons why the study might not be generalisable, which limits its use as an example.

I'm sorry for not explaining why I removed Fiddler on the Roof. I'm sure large amounts of examples can be found, and this doesn't seem to be a very good one - what does an American writer know about the ideal of beauty in early 20th century Russia? Or is it used as a plot device? Either way, it would be much better to have a secondary source that makes a scientific inventory of perceptions of obesity in various cultures. I cannot imagine these studies have not been conducted - we already have a fairly good one in the form of Powdermaker's chapter in "Food and Culture".

Removing content is not forbidden. I am personally an advocate of the BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. Content is added. If it sticks, great. If it doesn't, there is a talkpage. Again apologies for not clarifying the Fiddler on the Roof reference. JFW | T@lk 05:26, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Concerning primary sources: I have personally taken to citing both the primary source and the secondary source that confirms its relevance (as can be seen on my recent edits to hypopituitarism, where I cite both Simmonds' original paper and the Schneider review to confirm its status as first report). This removes concerns about distortion while ensuring that the sources are relevant.

There is little precedent for using UpToDate as a secondary source. You could try raising this on WT:MEDRS. JFW | T@lk 13:57, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Re:Obesity Pictures

Hi James

In response to your request, my height and weight at the time the pictures were taken was 322lb/146kg and Height was 5ft 10in, so my BMI at the time was 46.2. I'd be happy to do newer pictures that would probably be better, but I've lost about 50lb since the pics were taken. Just let me know what would be prefferable =] - FatM1ke (talk) 03:24, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Mike, would you be able to find pictures of slighly higher quality? The image you uploaded has fairly poor lighting, if you don't mind me saying. JFW | T@lk 12:51, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Not at that weight, though I am still obese now (5ft 11, 270lb, BMI 37.7). The fact that I lost weight reasonably easily probably leads to it been idiopathic / spontaneous obesity, though I have been obese since very early childhood and was unable to lose weight until after puberty was over, so I'm not 100% sure. The GPs I've had since then haven't really shown much care to it due to the fact I've always been in a reasonably healthy state for that period of time, and for quite some time during my childhood attempted to lose weight. I will get back to you with some better pictures shortly - FatM1ke (talk) 14:10, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Had some spare time then, and uploaded some pictures that you are able to use for your article image: http://commons.wikimedia.org/Image:ObeseManFrontView.jpg - http://commons.wikimedia.org/Image:ObeseManSideView.jpg . Hope these have appropriate lighting, clothing and background. Respond back if changes need to be made. - FatM1ke (talk) 14:42, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Spelling, again, and sources

James, could I please ask you again to proofread your contributions and do the utmost to improve your spelling? I have again had to remove a number of instances of "weight lose" from the article.

I have also noticed that you sometimes use the same source several times, e.g. the Robert Pool book. This is fine, but it saves hassle if you use WP:REFNAME. I have fixed this now. JFW | T@lk 12:51, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

Totally agree with the Fruity One that you are deserving of a barnstar for your hard work, especially your commitment to adequate sourcing and updating the long-neglected obesity article. JFW | T@lk 07:49, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Socioeconomic factors

Well done for tidying up that section. Have you any idea how to get rid of the bullet points? It is not exactly an enumeration. PS don't forget to provide edit summaries; we all forget sometimes. JFW | T@lk 17:03, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Page move

Just letting you know that I have undone your move of obesity to adult obesity. Page moves of important pages should never happen without a formal request for a page move, and consensus on the appropriate name. While the concept "adult obesity" is more specific, I think the word "obesity" without a modifier is used more commonly in discussions about adult obesity (see any published article in the professional literature). If you are still keen to have the page moved please follow the instructions on WP:RM. JFW | T@lk 21:42, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Multiple instances of same reference

You are using Caballero multiple times. Once the reference has been created once, you can name it <ref name=Caballero>{{cite journal ... }}</ref> and then continue to call it by simply adding <ref name=Caballero/>. See WP:FN for details. JFW | T@lk 23:05, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

NY Times article

James, just drop the NY Times article. It doesn't mention anywhere the concepts of "chubby culture" or "fat admirer". You should also not use WP:UNDO without an edit summary unless it is blatant vandalism you are removing. JFW | T@lk 17:38, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, despite using search on the NY Times article I missed the reference to the fat admirer. It is a very old source though. Agree we should discuss this on Talk:Obesity. JFW | T@lk 17:46, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Got Lancet?

There's still a fair bit of stuff that could do with better sources. I've dug up a reprint of Haslam & James' 2005 Lancet review which has a fair bit on the medical consequences of obesity. Have you got access to it? I think it is useful. JFW | T@lk 17:10, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Help with Low-Carb Diet

Hi,

JFW nominated you as someone who might be able to help me out.

I have made some efforts to clean up the low-carbohydrate diet article but more work needs to be done. Because I do not have a medical or nutritional background I am hitting a bit of a wall. Aside from my obviously limited understanding of the physiological and metabolic details, I simply have limited access to texts for use as references and so the referencing in the article is fairly poor. That is, apart from describing the theories put forth by low-carb advocates the article also needs to be able to describe the uncontested aspects of human physiology that are relevant to the subject. Although I can locate texts online which discuss many of the issues the discussions are usually buried in the midst of broader discussions. Often the only succinct discussions of the relevant issues that I can find are from physicians that are know low-carb proponents. Unfortunately that tends to make anything they write on the subject considered biased.

Anyway, if this is a topic that interests you and you feel you might have time to help clean up the article a little, either by suggesting references or by directly improving the text, please feel free.

Thanks.

--Mcorazao (talk) 03:40, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

P.S. One other area I am curious if you have advice on. I have tried to find a way to summarize the research. The problem is that the interpretations of the research seem to run the gamut. I find widely varying interpretations even on the same study. So what I ended up doing is creating a very vaguely stated research section with a link to an article that gives a broad sampling of the available research. Seems like a sloppy way to approach this but I feel like if I try to boil this down further I have to interject my own interpretations which, of course, is wrong. --Mcorazao (talk) 03:40, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Still reading the book and it is a great read. My take of the literature is that none of the diets come out any better then the others in trials. Obesity is an exceedingly important topic which seems to have an easy solution which turn out to be not so easy. When it comes to diets and the low carb diet in particular everything seems to have been tried. Diets fail and disappears for a while and then comes back again. I think Atkins is the third time low card has been popular.

Thanks so much for your feedback.

Curious: Regarding the equal efficacy of the diets, are you referring simply to weight loss or to all of the metabolic aspects that have been analyzed? One of the aspects I find interesting is the research that points to improved lipids which -- it seems to me -- is fairly (but not entirely) consistent in the recent studies. Aside from this the isolated studies showing possible relationships with diabetes, cancer, and some neurological problems seems interesting (admittedly the research in those areas is sparse and, so, more anecdotal than conclusive). What is your take on all of that (i.e. what is reasonable to say in the article)?

Thanks.

--Mcorazao (talk) 16:03, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Another great source is uptodate. They have an indepth article on diets. If you need access send me your email and I can give you a free month subscription.

http://www.uptodate.com/online/content/topic.do?topicKey=obesity/4904#12 Doc James (talk) 06:43, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I don't have access. Thanks. --Mcorazao (talk) 16:03, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

RE: Adiposopathy

Sure, give me a link to the AfD page when you've made it please.

And yeah, I'll take a look at obesity tomorrow as that takes a bit more effort but I'll happily edit your photos now if you upload them to Commons and tell me what you want me to do with them.

Kind regards —] (] · ]) 22:54, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Wasn't quite right but I've sorted it now. Where are the images that you want editing? —] (] · ]) 23:02, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Haha fair enough, do feel free to contact me when you need them editing. Can I ask what medical specialty you're in? —] (] · ]) 23:06, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh very nice, it's a shame you weren't here when we needed help getting subarachnoid hemorrhage to FA! I'm just a layperson as of yet (I hope to study medicine after an initial degree in perhaps neuroscience) so I don't know what I'd do without the doctors here checking my facts that I get from PubMed.

Thanks, but I really don't deserve any credit. I stole lots of the code off other users (that's the beauty of GFDL licenses!). There's loads of stuff around if you want to try and make yourself one? —] (] · ]) 23:15, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Nice work so far on Obesity. I see you've made 34 edits today but I have very little idea what they were unless I study each one in detail, which is a little hard work. May I remind you of our edit summary feature? This aids other edits to know of what you've done without having to compare the differences between different articles! Just helps a little bit for others :) Thanks! —] (] · ]) 22:25, 25 August 2008 (UTC)