User:Saritaben/sandbox

Introduction
I am a student in NS 1150 at Cornell University. I am interested in topics like fad diets and their health effects across different demographics. I am excited to be editing wikipedia because it allows for the expansion of knowledge dissemination in an easily-consumable format. I hope to learn what goes into a Wikipedia article so that I will be better able to objectively evaluate future articles.

Choosing an Article
Article Evaluation Reasoning
 * 1) Meal replacement
 * 2) Liquid diet
 * 3) Soylent (meal replacement)

When told to think of a controversy related to nutrition, liquid meal replacement diets immediately came to my mind. They have been in the news and very controversial recently, particularly in regards to Soylent. I have read numerous articles that mock millennials for needing liquid meal replacements because of our ‘fast-paced’ and 'ignorant' lifestyle. Interestingly, there is not extensive information on liquid meal replacement diets on Wikipedia articles.

I have found three potential Wikipedia articles: First of all, I am very interested in the topic. I think it combines nutrition knowledge in a potentially very practical setting. My initial Wikipedia article was the third link, Soylent. It was the most specific search and surprisingly, that was the strongest Wikipedia page. I’m very interested in meal replacement and liquid diets because of their widespread controversy. I have read very little actual medical perspectives about them and would like to explore this from a less pop-culture perspective. I did my preliminary searching in google, because that is the search engine I am most comfortable using. I found many conflicting opinions, from “why you should never” to “top 7 choices”. There were also a lot of advertisements for the current meal replacement companies which did not surprise me. There is such a large market in dieting. It did surprise me, however, how little actual medical discussion were going on. Most articles were using anecdotal evidence to prove their point, or used information directly from the liquid meal replacement diet companies which did not seem very unbiased. To help combat this, I tried to disregard articles that seemed to connect to the companies themselves. I'm looking forward to learning more about this from a nutrition perspective that incorporates the knowledge from this class!
 * 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meal_replacement
 * 2) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_diet
 * 3) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soylent_(meal_replacement)

Mindless Eating
The Mindless Eating page is interesting because it is about a book written by a Cornell professor regarding a very pertinent nutrition and psychology topic. The content of the book is not fully fleshed out and could be improved. The list of chapters did not seem to fit the rest of the Wikipedia page; it was somewhat distracting because no other information. I would suggest either taking that out or adding summaries of each chapter.

The best section of the article is the "Mindless Eating Challenge" and "Effectiveness" paragraphs because they provide the most factual information while still being easy to read. The paragraphs on "psychology" and "environment" could use more specificity in the actual studies that Dr. Wansink wrote about.

In terms of maintaining a neutral viewpoint, I think this is the most lacking area. The majority of the references are of Dr. Wansink's work which only provides one perspective and body of work. Incorporating other researchers could help balance this out.

More logistical adjustments need to be made as well; many of the citation links are no longer active. This means that many of the claims made in the body of the article are not supported.

Paleolithic Diet
This page seems to be in a pretty good place. Most of the references are active links and the information presented is neutral, thorough, and supported by references. There is a lot about the history and origination of the diet but I think it could use more modern day material. Perhaps a section on the 'popularity of the diet' could be a good addition to the article. I think the article could also benefit from an expansion of the 'health effects' section; subheadings of Positive and Negative Effects would be a nice way to organize it. I think the article might be slightly out of date; it claims there have not been major studies regarding the health effects of a paleo diet, but I'm sure there is relevant research published. The best part of this article is the balance of counter arguments so no one viewpoint is vastly overrepresented. I also think the article does a good job of redirecting people to relevant, similar diets.

Module 4
Annotated Bibliography for Module 4 can be found here

Final Wikipedia Assignment
The use of a clear liquid diet during a patient’s perioperative recovery has recently become a matter of controversy. The Mayo Clinic describes “a clear liquid diet helps maintain adequate hydration, provides some important electrolytes, such as sodium and potassium, and gives some energy at a time when a full diet isn’t possible or recommended”. The risks associated with a clear liquid diet result from a lack of adequate calories and nutrients so it should be used short-term and by a doctor’s recommendation only. Important considerations ensue especially with diabetics; the Mayo Clinic advises a clear liquid diet should consist of “200 grams of carbohydrate spread equally throughout the day to help manage blood glucose”.

Variables such as hospital stay and amount of nausea are being tested to compare the efficacy of a clear liquid diet versus a more substantial soft diets. Recent research suggests that a clear liquid diet is not especially harmful when compared to a soft diet. In one clinical trial studying acute pancreatitis treatment, a soft diet had a median of 2 days less in the length of hospitalization. Oral referring with a soft diet, rather than a clear liquid diet, to treat mild acute pancreatitis could result in a shorter length of hospitalization. However, a separate clinical study also studying acute pancreatitis found that there was no difference in pain or nausea between the two groups of a clear liquid diet or low-fat solid diet after hospitalization and found no significant difference in the length of hospitalization or re-admission rates after 28 days. Overall, the study concluded that oral nutrition after mild acute pancreatitis could safely be down with a low-fat solid diet.

Social factors such as support groups, sustained weight loss, and adherence to treatment are also being researched. Post-operative patients of laparoscopic adjustable gastric binding surgery were observed. Patients who attended support groups achieved more weight loss and were more likely to adhere to a clear liquid diet. Similar results were found for children receiving treatment for encopresis. Enhanced interventions were found to improve a child’s fluid goal adherence by modifying daily fluid intake to include more water and less juice. Nutrition based education and behavioral strategies increase the likelihood of perioperative patients in abiding by clear fluid goals.

Reflist

 * 1) Hall, H.D. and C. A. Schneyer (01 December 1964). “Salivary Gland Atrophy in Rat Induced by Liquid Diet”. Experimental Biology and Medicine. 117: 789-793 - via Sage Pub. https://doi.org/10.3181/00379727-117-29699
 * 2) Lindros, Kai O. and Harri A. Jarvelainen (01 July 1998). “A New Oral Low-Carbohydrate Alcohol Liquid Diet Producing Liver Lesions: A Preliminary Account”. Oxford Journal on Alcohol and Alcoholism. 33: 347-353. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.alcalc.a008403.
 * 3) Brown, M. R., et. al. (01 July 1983). “A high protein, low calorie liquid diet in the treatment of very obese adolescents: long-term effect on lead body mass”. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 38: 20-31. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcn/38.1.20
 * 4) Sathiaraj, E., et. al. (20 August 2008). “Clinical trial: oral feeding with a soft diet compared with clear liquid diet as initial meal in mild acute pancreatitis”. Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics. 6: 661-664. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2036.2008.03794.x