User talk:Bizosilva

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ~, which will automatically produce your name and the date.
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or place  on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

Ultrasound
Hi Bizosilva! Thanks much for the great addition to pulmonary contusion. I'm guessing you have some expertise in chest or trauma medicine? I don't see in the sources "ultrasound is currently used in the diagnosis of pulmonary contusion", and I didn't come across that info while writing the article. Do you have a source that does back up that statement? I feel like the diagnosis section should be limited to current diagnostic techniques, don't you? If the info is more general (i.e. not specific to PC), I wonder if maybe we should move it to a more general article like chest trauma. Anyway, I'm eager to hear your thoughts, here, my talk page or the article's talk page, whichever is easiest for you. Thanks again for helping out, I'm sorry for nagging you about it. I look forward to working with you! Peace,  delldot   &nabla;.  05:01, 28 November 2008 (UTC)


 * PS: There are a bunch of doctors and other wikipedians interested in medical subjects who discuss medical stuff on wikipedia here. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:07, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Heeeey, this Wikipediaing thing is really cool! But sorry guys, I'm absolutely newbie to Wikipedia, I'm not even sure if I'm replying where I am supposed to... :-)))

Pulmonary ultrasound is being used quite routinely in Europe, particularly in Italy, Germany and France, where most of the fundamental literature came from. It is absolutely true that in the USA - and probably most of the world - pulmonary ultrasound is still a "voodoo" tool... :-))) The quantity of evidence is small for pulmonary contusion, but is solid. I understand I am biased not only for being one of the authors of the reference paper, but by using it routinely in my clinical practice I got quite comfortable with the method. It is one of those tools that one you start using it you don't understand why you didn't use before. Not even citing the facts that it is ridiculously inexpensive, does not expose the patient to radiation, and is extremely easy to learn end perform. The perfect tool for the developing world.

As I said, I'm newbie editing Wikipedia, I don't know if it should not be there, but I believe the fact that Wikipedia is created in real time as the knowledge is being developed it should not not include what is new. I think if it is not universally known it is one more reason to be published, if it is legitimate and for the good. Anyway, I will not feel absolutely offended if you believe we should wait for pulmonary ultrasound to get more known to publish it, ok?

Thanks!!! Bizosilva (talk) 06:57, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

P.S.: By the way, Delldot, congratulations on the article! It is excellent! I just finished my masters one year ago, on pulmonary contusion. If I had your article when I wrote it, it would have been waaaaay easier! :-) Bizosilva (talk) 07:00, 28 November 2008 (UTC)