Talk:The Family That Walks on All Fours

Origin of the gait
It seems the origin of the gait is solved: https://sciencenordic.com/brain-denmark-fat/mystery-solved-why-a-turkish-family-walks-on-all-fours/1402928 I'm not good enough with english to edit, so if someone could do it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:908:163:30A0:A97A:7951:A60:E911 (talk) 06:44, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Synopsis
Is the "Wikipedia articles with plot summary needing attention" tag appropriate here? Looking at other articles tagged with this, I find they are all fiction. But this is a science documentary about people.
 * 1) that means it does not have a plot.
 * 2) that great care is needed in discussing the work rather than summarizing what it says for reasons of potential libel (the documentary at its end reports on the Turkish arm trying to stop filming and after the film was broadcast there was considerable controversy and some legal threats).
 * 3) it has a scientific content particularly for those interested in the particular condition it documented and any attempt to summarize this risks removing information that some may consider important. --LittleHow (talk) 15:28, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe the synopsis is long, but I also do not feel that it is unnecessarily long. This is a non-trivial program that probably defies a neat, simple, description. Having read the synopsis, I found it both helpful and informative in understanding the content of this program, particularly in putting it in the context of the many (and complex) interplaying factors (social, religious, genetic and evolutionary, to name a few). Enquire (talk) 13:43, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

bad sentence
I'm not sure how to change this to make sense, but this sentence So the brain cannot be the whole story since individuals born with a lack of cerebellum can still in a manner walk with bipedality. is funny, because people do need their cerebellum : ) It seems to be referring to the cerebral worm defect. 80.101.162.155 (talk) 12:45, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * It is fine as is. It makes sense, it is not funny. Enquire (talk) 13:43, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, it is not fine. I reread it three times because a contrafactual statement is embedded and suggests a paradigm shift in brain and mind physiology. One is left with the false fact that one can live without a cerebellum, in fact be born without one. Not being a doctor, I don't know if that is possible or not possible, but the sentence indicates that is is. Being able to survive without a cerebellum seems extraordinary. Perhaps the sentence should read: So the brain cannot be the whole story since individuals born with cerebellar ataxia can still in a manner walk with bipedality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.80.231.8 (talk) 01:00, 7 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Agreed. It's a terribly written sentence.