Talk:Developmental toxicity

Merge from Teratology
The result was not merged. --  SAMI  talk 10:26, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

This article was proposed to be merged to teratology. In fact, teratogenicity is a special case of developmental toxicology leading to structural malformations. There are many other forms of developmental effects that are not terata. Examples are slow physical or mental development.Viinamakelainen (talk) 20:55, 16 December 2011 (UTC)


 * The mergeing proposal was anonymously made and was not associated with an entry here, contrary to Wiki convention. As Viinamakelainen states, Developmental toxicity is the wider term.  It follows that if a merge is to be made then it is Teratology that should be merged with this article not vice versa.  Perhaps the optimum solution would be for the Teratology article to be renamed Developmental toxicity and for this article to be made into the introduction of that. LookingGlass (talk) 05:05, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose, since Teratology also covers teratogenic effects of infections, which can not themselves be called toxic substances. Thus, neither Teratology nor Developmental toxicology can be called "wider", but are rather two largely overlapping articles, both with some unique features. Mikael Häggström (talk) 16:17, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * On second thought, I support a merge. With so many related articles (Developmental toxicity, Teratology, Congenital disorder and Environmental toxins and fetal development, I don't think we can afford to oppose a merger like this for a relatively small issue about definition. An explanation in the article is enough, which I'll do right now. Mikael Häggström (talk) 16:34, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Aren't the teratogenic effects of infections caused by the toxins generated by the pathogens rather than by the pathogens directly? LookingGlass (talk) 09:15, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
 * On third thought, I again oppose a merge. Looking at Congenital_abnormalities, there are so many more causes of congenital abdormalities than toxins. As for infections, a direct teratogenic effect must be the case in viral infections rather than by producing toxins. The only reason I see for keeping this article of Developmental toxicity is because its scope includes teratogenic effects after birth, but in order to keep being included by that justification I think it needs to provide some actual examples of teratogenicity after birth. Mikael Häggström (talk) 21:31, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Naming
Mikael Häggström, I see the merge and naming discussion above. I've been looking for resources under the term "developmental toxicity", and there doesn't seem to be many quality resources under this name. There seems to be more resources that describe the process without using the term "developmental toxicity." For instance, in this article, there's a line that says, "The substance that causes developmental toxicity from embryonic stage to birth is called teratogens." But if you look for a resource for it, you'll more likely find resources that simply talk about this being teratogens without the term "developmental toxicity" used in them. I've accessed some decent resources that use the term "developmental toxicity", but I wonder if the article should be based only on resources that use that term because of how original research might be interpreted. If it's evident that the resource is about this topic, I suppose it's okay to use the resource even when the term "developmental toxicity" doesn't appear in it? I've noticed that citations in the article are like that.

Viinamakelainen and LookingGlass, what do you think? GBFEE (talk) 20:45, 18 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Mikael Häggström, forgive me, but you appear to be trying to reopen the merge discussion which has been closed i.e resolved as REJECTED. You write: "I see the merge and naming discussion above", as if you have just come across it, yet you contributed almost all the posts to it.  My views about it remain unchanged and echo those originally expressed by Viinamakelainen
 * LookingGlass (talk) 10:06, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * LookingGlass, it wasn't Mikael Häggström who started this discussion. It was me. See the time stamp. I'm not re-opening a discussion since the previous was about merging, although it also considered the more encompassing name. This is a different discussion explaining the lack of the term "developmental toxicity" in quality resources. Very often, some other term is used in the resource instead. So I asked how a person should proceed with sourcing this article. I was asking about using resources for it when those resources don't use the term "developmental toxicity" at all. GBFEE (talk) 19:59, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks GBFEE for explaining the situation. As for your question, I think it is acceptable to add references that do not specifically use the same wording as an article title, as long as the scope is reasonably the same. Mikael Häggström (talk) 15:33, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Re addressee, my bad (note to self: it's clearer to use @). Re naming, I think the key in this article is that it should contain information on the subject rather than only contain that information from sources that use the name of the subject; AND that it should not include OR. There seems no contradiction here.  LookingGlass (talk) 12:06, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Comparative Developmental Biology
— Assignment last updated by Najjar123 (talk) 19:07, 10 March 2023 (UTC)