Talk:Bright's disease

Other notable fatalities
Alice Lee Roosevelt, first wife of president Theadore Roosevelt also died of Bright's disease. Kate Chase Sprague, daughter of Treasury Sec'y and later Supreme Court Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase, and the leading Washington socialite of the Lincoln Administration. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.208.180.6 (talk) 00:13, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

I think Linus Pauling. "In 1941, at age 40, Pauling was diagnosed with Bright's disease, a renal disease." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drsruli (talk • contribs) 17:44, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Suggestions
It is not clear from this article what is current protocol for treating for this condition. If someone has that information, it should be included in the article. yes it should!

If it isn't referred to as Bright's Disease any longer, what is it referred to as?

Apparently the Physicist Linus Pauling had bright's disease at 40 years old but lived to 94, or so it says in his wikipedia article. It says something about a low-protein low-salt diet. Also, I think this whole page probably needs a re-write, as nutcases (I found a promotion of homeopathy in it) have been at it, and it's quite unclear.

Several questions arise in my non-medical mind that this article should answer. (1) Does Bright's Disease differ from kidney failure? (2) Is it plausible to a 21st century physician that so many seem to have died of kidney failure in the past? (3) What common diseases or conditions cause kidney failure/Bright's Disease if untreated? (Hypertension perhaps?) It is my impression that the current protocol for treating this condition (queried above) is dialysis or kidney transplant. If there is any other protocol, including treatment for the underlying condition, it should be mentioned.Ccerf (talk) 18:26, 2 February 2008 (UTC)


 * My late mother had Bright's Disease and a set of 1967 medical encyclopedias that described it. Sadly we gave away the encyclopedia after my mother passed away but given this is a historic term which has been grouped with several other conditions that is where the search for what Bright's Disease was must begin.--BruceGrubb (talk) 09:22, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I'd like to take this paragraph out because . ..
<>

A. "Duke's medical program" is too vague for a citation

B. "The propaganda" is unspecified.

C. "The media." What media? Who in the media?

D.. . . "just made up". . . evidence?

Pittsburgh Poet (talk) 00:33, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Tzar Alexander III
i read in one site, that Russia's Tzar Alexander III died of this disease.is this correct?The article also doesn't shows the cause of this disease.Agre22 (talk) 22:48, 5 July 2008 (UTC)agre22--Parkwells (talk) 01:35, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Notable victims
What is the point of this list? There is nothing to be learned from it; you can't prevent the disease by knowing who had it.--Parkwells (talk) 01:35, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

It is helpful to know who some of the victims of the disease for these reasons, and probably others, as well:

1. Diagnosis of the disease can be facilitated when an individual knows that one or more members of his family suffered from it. (Notice how forms in doctors' offices ask if anyone in your family suffered from various illnesses?)

2. Certain illnesses seem to occur with higher frequency in certain parts of the world. For instance, a high incidence of M.S. has been noted amongst those who grew up on the American west coast.

Any verifiable data accumulated in one place is helpful in the ongoing war against disease. Bright's Disease is a particularly cruel illness. I'm glad for any information contributed. As it happens, I am descended from some of these victims of Bright's Disease. Knowing this allows my family to be a little more carefully monitored for kidney disease.

I hope this answers your question.

Best wishes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alnilamh (talk • contribs) 22:11, 22 January 2009 (UTC) I contracted Brights disease (acute nephritis) at age seven and was treated with penicillin injections. I experienced a full recovery. I believe that this was the treatment used by physicians in the 1940's and 50's. 172.164.37.102 (talk) 22:41, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

It gives context: It gives us a rough sketch of its prevalence and thereby increases our knowledge of times past. It also feeds our knowledge from another direction--a set of particular facts about other topics. Did you already know Chester A Arthur died of it? I didn't. --216.197.252.102 (talk) 20:11, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Should Shakespeare be added? I read in *A Life of William Shakespeare* by J.Q. Adams that there is some suspicion that he may have died of Brights. It's an old book, and could be out of date. --216.197.252.102 (talk) 20:14, 22 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Shakespeare could have died of almost anything, but he certainly didn't die of Bright's: the condition does not exist. By "historical term" the article means "disease that is now known not to exist as a single disease, but was thought to exist historically". --NellieBly (talk) 10:38, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Linus Pauling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drsruli (talk • contribs) 09:12, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Consistency in Notable Victims list
The dating in the notable victims list is highly variable. For most of those listed, there are no dates; for a few, there is a date of death (presumably, from Bright's disease); and for the remainder, there is an entire lifespan listed, such as (1835-1898). There also variation in placing of this information, from immediately after the person's name to in a descriptive statement that follows.

It seems like there should be more consistency here. The logical solution, I think, is just to provide the lifespan information and just to note, where it is confirmed, that Bright's disease was the cause of death. But before deleting or adding any information, I thought I'd post the suggestion here first, as it is a long list. 69.125.134.86 (talk) 09:06, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Bright's disease. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080923142759/http://www.olympusmicro.com:80/galleries/abramowitz/pages/oxalicacid1small.html to http://www.olympusmicro.com/galleries/abramowitz/pages/oxalicacid1small.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 22:27, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Victorian civil engineering and caisson disease
I understand, although don't have adequate sources for, that Bright's disease was a result, in some cases, of chronic caisson disease, amongst underground workers engaged in tunnelling under water. In Victorian times, a new technique was developed for this, that of the pressure caisson. At least two prominent civil engineers, Brunel and Thomas Walker died of Bright's disease. Cases were particularly widespread in New York and Chicago, especially after the construction of Chicago's water intakes from Lake Michigan.

Does anyone know more? With sources?

(The WP redirect for caisson disease is wrong - it's the chronic disease of exposure to caisson pressures, not the acute mismanagement of decompression.) Andy Dingley (talk) 12:49, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

"a historical" versus "an historical"
User Crossark chose to revert my changing of the indefinite article "a" to "an" ("...an historical classification...") in the lede. His justification was stated as "Unnecessary copyedit based on a common difference b/w American and British English. If the change doesn't affect the meaning of the sentence, generally the rule is not to make the edit." I don't know what "general rule" he's citing, but I'm not convinced by his assertion. First, because Wikipedia is not an American platform; the English-language version is used throughout the English-speaking world, and it is rife with British spellings (such as "favour" versus the American "favor"). And it's ironic that Crossark seems to be wanting to impose Americanisms upon an article about a disease that was, after all, discovered by a Briton, and whose only illustration is from a British publication. But apparently the article's use of indefinite articles must conform with American grammar conventions. Regardless, the use of "a" versus "an" is not simply a matter of British versus American English. Here is just one example of "an historical" being used in the American periodical the Wall Street Journal: "And, from an historical perspective, Greece's track record as a creditor is checkered." (6th paragraph, 2nd sentence) Indeed, there is no rule. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary of English Usage (an American publication) states "A few words, such as historic and (especially in England) hotel, are in transition, and may be found with either a or an. You choose the article that best suits your own pronunciation." (emphasis added) Furthermore, Crossark asserted "If the change doesn't affect the meaning of the sentence...", but that is precisely what using "a historical" does, since "a-" is also used as a prefix of negation for the word to which it is attached. Using "a historic" or "a historical" introduces confusion because the words "ahistoric" and "ahistorical" have the opposite meaning of that which is intended. The object of an encyclopedia is clarity, and that is better served by using "an historical". Bricology (talk) 00:57, 26 February 2019 (UTC)


 * H isn't a vowel. So why an? Aminabzz (talk) 14:35, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Merge with Glomerulonephritis?
It seems this disease is the same as Glomerulonephritis, so why do we have two seperate articles about them? DrKilleMoff (talk) 11:23, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

Isaac Charles Parker
He also died of the disease. Aminabzz (talk) 14:36, 23 September 2023 (UTC)