User talk:Genserico~enwiki

Sleep apnea
Since there are no kids around, you may spare the fact my article received or not a friendly reception. What is needed is not a friendly but an intelligent reception. A reception that honours one of Wikipedia's "strategic priorities": to "encourage innovation".

My article is about Non Obstructive Sleep APnea (NOSA), so when you ask me to write about “Obstructive Apnea and type II Diabetes” you might as well ask me to write about cinema or antropologhy.

When you say “Exercise, both to condition the lungs and to fight high blood sugar, is never a bad thing either” or when you pontificate about the supposed correlation between SA and diabetes (“Since either might be present in a mild form that is undiagnosed, the overlap between the two diseases is very strong - I think proper treatment should involve immediate very low calorie diet to give the pancreas a fighting chance, together with other drugs as appropriate. I see no harm if most overweight people noting signs of sleep apnea would begin a very low calorie diet immediately, just based on the tremendous suspicion that diabetes is already getting started.”), you are showing: a. That you have not read even the advice we give (for free, no conditions) to NOSA patients, which obviously include what you say about exercising. b. You know nothing about NOSA (“just based on the tremendous suspicion that diabetes is already getting started”). Where did you take this from? What are your sources? c. That you dare to propose solutions for NOSA (go and exercise) and theories (NOSA absolutely has to do with diabetes) while you do not allow my theory on NOSA to be known. I’ve written a book on the subject, which means I’ve worked long and hard on it. What about you? It is not that I deny your right to propose solutions and even to state new theories. It is you who denies me this right.

When you say “Focus on good coverage of third-party sources, like journal articles you might have cited in your book¨”, you forgot some essential facts: a. This is a whole new theory, so there are no previous theories that confirm it. b. As each and every new theory, this one goes against prevalent paradigms. To “encourage innovation” absolutely requires to confront a paradigm. c. In my book I mention the theories of a scientific who has made a great contribution to the understanding of the absolute need of enough sodium in blood: Nobel Prize Awarded Dr. Jens Scou. d. I mentioned the fact HuffingtonPost did submit my theory to medical experts and that they gave a go ahead to its publication. Why Wikipedia does not accept this fact and does not publish my theory? Who is being benefited by your decision? Who are being damaged by it? e. There are individuals, besides me, who have experienced the fact that NOSA derives from low sodium in blood. This is part of the research I have done. And you may find people who has experienced this and who has reported it in their comments at HuffingtonPost blog.

Finally, a normal person would have a friendly reception towards who tries to help people, which is what I am doing: I try to help NOSA patients. I offer them for free all the info they need to overcome and to prevent NOSA. I do that without requiring from them anything at all. Additionally I give my book for free to every medicine doctor interested in the subject. NOSA patients are diagnosed that they suffer from an illness that does not exist (Central Apnea) and they are condemned for life to a use a useless impairing CPAP, so they need help. I just try to let them know two things: a. There is no evidence of the fact they might suffer form a Central Nervous System malfunctioning b. With a very little and harmless effort (eat enough common salt during three straight days) they might immediately get a cure for their “Central” Apnea, which supposedly has no cure. If this is no cure, they stop eating salt and they go back to CPAP.

Why, then, this unfriendly reception?

Your words: "As you know, your comments on the Science Refdesk didn't get a very friendly reception - Wikipedia has certain ways of doing things, and can be hostile to anything that even smells a little like spam. This doesn't mean you can't contribute productively; just go over some of the stuff like WP:NOR and WP:COI to avoid trouble.  Focus on good coverage of third-party sources, like journal articles you might have cited in your book - if you expect to add a whole new theory to the article, you'll need a lot of these.  Many people generally advise that when you're directly involved in an article, you should suggest your edit on the talk page so neutral parties can go over it.

That said, I tend to share your general feeling that CPAP is a just absurd medieval solution to a more fundamental problem. While searching gets some results that I don't readily see pointing the way you say I wouldn't rule it out based on that study, because for example it is possible that the patients were unconsciously self-medicating leading to this correlation. Still, I don't see any test of this hypothesis yet. For example, it is possible that you have a very unusual form of the problem, applicable to no one else; I'd need to see hard data to prove otherwise.

If you continue to speak out on this issue, I hope you'll make a note of the relationship between obstructive sleep apnea and type 2 diabetes when appropriate. Since either might be present in a mild form that is undiagnosed, the overlap between the two diseases is very strong - I think proper treatment should involve immediate very low calorie diet to give the pancreas a fighting chance, together with other drugs as appropriate. I see no harm if most overweight people noting signs of sleep apnea would begin a very low calorie diet immediately, just based on the tremendous suspicion that diabetes is already getting started. Exercise, both to condition the lungs and to fight high blood sugar, is never a bad thing either. Wnt (talk) 13:24, 29 May 2012 (UTC)"


 * Sorry for any misunderstanding - I just thought if you were going to talk about the one type of sleep apnea in general purpose articles it might not be bad to talk about the other also. I understand the two are different.  And I wouldn't dare to push my solutions in the article.  I also don't expect you have to go along with them either; it was just an idea.  I shouldn't really have mixed my own thoughts with the Wikipedia suggestions, because I didn't want to be coming off as trying to force you to go along with my haphazard thoughts.  I've not been above making blue-sky comments on the Refdesk, and I think you should have the same privilege.  You ran a bit afoul when readers didn't recognize a question, and asking a question is taken as an invitation for people to give thoughts about it ... even when they're unfocused and tentative as my own.  As for advice dealing with Wikipedia - I didn't revert your addition.  I was only suggesting a route to take in a hope to get something in.  But remember - Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought; it's not at the leading edge of scientific progress.  Something has to get published by an outlet with editorial control (not self published) before we even look at it, and some of the "WP:MEDRS" believers are a lot tougher than that.  (Too tough, actually, but I'm just telling it how it is) Wnt (talk) 01:23, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Sleep apnea theory
Please could you give your theory in English? It would be fine to do it on this page, I will be looking out for it

Thanks very much. I really appreciate it. You can read one of my articles at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/antonio-garcia/a-way-out-of-sleep-apnea-_b_1501136.html?ref=sleep This article is very special for me because it was published by Huffington and, after 15 minutes, it was unpublished by them. They then mailed me saying they were going to submit it to a "medical preview". This took them 15 days. After that they send me a new mail informing me that my article has been approved by their medical review. Then they published it both in English and Spanish. Please read it and, if possible, some of the comments they have received. One of this comments, in spanish, states a NOSA patient has already noticed and informed his doctor that once he started eating rather salty canned fish his NOSA has vanished. He then says his own experience confirms my theory. I do not know who he is and I have no way of reaching him but through Huffington chat. Once you have read my article, and just in case you would consider to publish what I have already posted in Wikipedia ("Central Apnea contested") and it has been almost immediately unpublished two times, I am including its text at the end of this post. Additionally, if you are interested in it, I can send you for free a pdf file with my book on Sleep Apnea which has been published both in English and Spanish. I would appreciate immensely should you publish my post because, as you may read in my HuffingtonPost article, there are many reasons why Sleep Apnea patients strongly need help. And as you may see at www.rfkloss.org, we are offering them entirely for free, with no conditions at all, all the info they might need to check, harmlessly, in each individual case, whether my solution works for them or it does not. On the other hand I am willing to make to my Wikipedia post the adjustments you might deem necessary in order to make sure that there is no spam purpose in it. My proposed text to be included in Wikipedia immediately after "Central Sleep Apnea" and before "Mixed Apnea and Complex Sleep Apnea" is: "Central Sleep Apnea Theory contested In spite of the supposed existence of such an illness as Central Sleep Apnea, it is evident that Non Obstructive Sleep Apnea (NOSA) does not show the normal trends of a central nervous system failure, but it shows trends that are typical of a lack or a shortage of some chemical or nutrient. On the other hand, it has been demonstrated (and it may be easily verified) that NOSA patients stop showing NOSA symptoms as soon as they eat enough common salt, and that they fall back into NOSA as soon as they go into a low sodium diet. The book "SLEEP APNEA. Immediate cure for an illness with no cure”, written by Dario Varela, who overcame NOSA, thoroughly demonstrates that NOSA does not correspond to a typical central nervous system failure. And, based on 1997 Nobel awarded theories of Dr Jens Skou, it demonstrates why, under low sodium in blood, people tends not to breath while asleep. At www.rfkloss.org, NOSA patients can get free information on how to handle and to overcome their health condition. Medicine doctors are invited to submit their NOSA patients to an appropriate sodium diet, so they can verify that their illness is not the result of a Central Neural System failure but it is just the result of low sodium in blood. Medicine doctors are invited to observe that patients go back to NOSA as soon as they do not get enough sodium, and doctors are asked to report their findings and to help this knowledge be known, considering this is a very easy way out of Non Obstructive Sleep Apnea, that there is no way of recovering from NOSA by means of using a CPAP, and that CPAP users suffer the rigors of trying to improve their lives by means of depending on a costly useless medical device. Thanks once again. I truly appreciate your willingness to spend time in this effort Best regards Antonio Garcia V (aka) Dario Varela, engineer, historian, writer

20120614 Gentlemen I have being waiting for your answer since May (2012, I must acknowledge) Is it my answer was not satisfactory? Is it I must guess what's going on? Is it the fact I am trying to help NOSA patients by means of informing them through wikipedia is not a positive activity? Should the case is that my last edition does not means a theory or was not what you expected from me, these are the theories developed in my book most directly related with the fact low sodium in blood means no autonomous breathing:

Page 14: "DEMONSTRATION NUMBER 2: THEORETICAL DEMONSTRATION In Chapter 18, “Sodium - Potassium Pump”, there is information about this protein. In fact its discovery was awarded with the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in 1997 and shows that muscles and nerves absolutely need, in order to work properly, the simultaneous presence of enough sodium and potassium. Findings are A. Not enough sodium means a great drop in muscular efficacy. When the “Sodium - Potassium Pump” does not work properly muscles do not deliver enough energy. And it does not mean a little diminishing. The said “pump”, which in fact is a protein, is accountable for two thirds of muscular energy, and by definition energy is the capability of doing work. It is also known that the process of inhaling and exhaling depends upon the performance of an important number of muscles, part of which must expand thorax and abdomen and the rest of which must contract them. And it is clear that those responsible of inhaling must work harder since it is easier to exhale than to inhale. There is the need of a larger work to expand the lungs than to contract them. To intake air than to throw it out. When his muscular efficacy gradually diminishes, patient tends to breathe with progressively lighter inhalations, in such a way that when he sleeps his breathing becomes lighter and lighter until he enters in a sequence of successive asphyxias and reactions to them. This reaction, this becoming awaken to get back in charge and breathe will be sooner, more agile, as long as sleep is less profound. On the contrary, a deep sleep will mean for the patient to suffer a stronger asphyxia before he can manage to wake up and start breathing by himself. And this will bring larger collateral risks and damages. Other factors that might aggravate the situation must be taken into account. Unless he develops intense physical activity, which seldom happens, months or years suffering Apneas induce the patient to get used to breathe with increasing low intensity. He will rarely make strong use of his lungs. When not sleeping he will use 5 to 10% of his lung capacity. This low use of pulmonary capacity has two important consequences. On one hand, it means an increasing atrophy of muscles involved in breathing. They keep losing volume and competence. And if once they become weak they are submitted to a low sodium condition that does not allow them to act efficiently then breathe is under a great risk. On the other hand, he who breathes making a very light use of his lung capacity will have a reduced margin to reduce his breathing volume. He makes such a poor use of his lungs that a little reduction in thorax expansion or inhaling will bring him into the zone where he does not get as much oxygen as he needs. B. Not enough sodium in blood means a strong drop in neural efficiency and in the ability of nerves to communicate between each other and with muscles. Both in the case of muscular and neural cells, “Sodium - Potassium Pump” is responsible of five functions, each of them absolutely essential to life. One of these functions is the capability of the cell to detect electric signals or stimulus. Then under low sodium conditions the neural system detects, transmits and communicates late and in an inefficient way. And when it gives orders to muscles it happens that muscles are under a diminished capability of detecting signals and thus to react to them. Patient does not confront a Central deficiency or a failure which is located in the headquarters of his vegetative or autonomous system. He is under a scenario where his nerves, the tools he has to detect, transmit and communicate are diminished, are weakened. And additionally the capability of his muscles to detect the orders they receive is impaired, not to mention the fact that once they finally get the order they will barely find themselves in proper condition to respond to them. No wonder then that a sophisticated and delicate process of so subtle equilibriums as breathe will stop operating autonomously when sodium diminishes across the organism. And additionally the complex system of alarms that would allow the central nervous system to react will do it late and badly to such an extreme that the individual that suffers of a sodium deficiency must wake up in order to voluntarily take the measures that will help him to avoid dying by asphyxia. All these facts and physiological functions and responses are well known by experts, but the dogma that states that salt is harmful impedes doctors to understand something they know: that by forbidding their patients to eat salt they submit them to a sodium shortage that causes them important problems and unbearable suffering."

Page 73: "Chapter 19 THE “SODIUM POTASSIUM PUMP” The so called “Sodium (Na) – Potassium (K) Pump” is a protein that is part of the membrane of the cell of every muscle and nerve. This protein is responsible of several physiological functions that are vital for animal life. It was discovered more than fifty years ago by the Danish Jens Skou, but his great importance seems to have been understood many years later, since only in 1997 Skou received the Nobel Prize in Chemistry in recognition of this discovery and since the number of medical and scientific papers on this subject keeps growing. The amount of 2010 and later entrances on Internet about the “Na-K pump” is quite amazing. This protein is so important for muscles that it might store up to two thirds of the total energy the muscular cell keeps in form of Adenosine triphosphate (ATP), which in turn is known as “the mayor energy currency molecule of a cell”. The said “pump” additionally is essential for feeding the cell, for the conservation of its volume and of his ability of transmitting nerve impulses. If this were not enough, the “pump” is by itself a signals receptor, which makes it a fundamental part of communication, operation and control of a cell. Its name derives from the main apparent activity it develops, which is to introduce to the inside of the cell the sodium located outside of it and, in this same process, it does the opposite with potassium. It must be noticed that most nutrients enter the cell when sodium does. To demonstrate the high correlation between sodium in blood and muscular efficacy is a subjects that goes beyond the scope of this book, but it undoubtedly happens that if there is not enough sodium around the cell as to guarantee the capability of this pump to properly perform, then the muscular activity is affected both from the energy (ability of performing work) and communications (ability of perceiving activation signals) viewpoints. Then at least it must be concluded that a shortage of sodium in blood has the following consequences for each muscular and neural cell: It will not store enough energy (muscle) It will not get enough nutrients (muscles and nerves) It will not be able to keep its volume (muscles and nerves) It will not be efficient in transmitting signals (nerves) It will have troubles in detecting signals to which it should react (muscles and nerves)

This is what is at stakes when you decide not to have enough salt. No wonder that when your sodium in blood is too low even to breathe will depend upon your conscious efforts."

Gentlemen: Kindly let me know what are you going to do with my proposition to include my theories within Wikipedia article on Sleep Apnea. Kindly consider that even if my theories were mistaken, which is not the case, they at least would be as mistaken as Central Apnea Theory is, and you are including this theory as if it has ever been demonstrated, which in not the case. As if it were not plainly absurd since it models the human organism as if it were an electromechanical XIX century machine and not a highly complex organic configuration. Sincerely Genserico

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Genserico. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Genserico~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 00:09, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 13:12, 22 April 2015 (UTC)