User talk:LeadSongDog/Archives/2008/July

Peak Oil page
Thanks for your response to my suggestion. I think I got off on a bad foot by unintentionally suggesting that I wanted to diverge into a discussion of consequences. I tried to restate my suggestion a different way. I am still plugging for some back-of-the-envelope comparisons.

Regards:

Lllbutcher (talk) 09:18, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * My point was simply that the results will mean nothing without considering the time scale. Carbon cycle re-balancing will occur under any conditions that still support life, but a global firestorm or cretaceous extinction event is quite different from global warming.  In any case, see WP:NOTCRYSTAL. LeadSongDog (talk) 13:04, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * There's talk of revamping the Peak oil lead, and I thought you might be interested in commenting. NJGW (talk) 00:38, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Memeron Neuropharmaceutical
Would you mine if we had a little further discussion on this? I would like to read some thoughts of other editors on the matter. --Philoprof (talk) 12:41, 22 June 2008 (UTC)Philoprof
 * Talk to whomever you like. I'm still waiting to see a phase III trial showing that your combination is somehow better than the alternatives.LeadSongDog (talk) 00:38, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I would like to keep the discussion going on the Alzheimer's discussion page if possible.--Philoprof (talk) 13:29, 24 June 2008 (UTC)Philoprof

If you developed something that works for AD, wouldn't you want to ask that it be considered for inclusion? You said that you didn't have a problem with further discussion. If that is so, then why do you keep stifling it on the AD discussion page? You seem to think you are the final authority on the Alzheimer's page. Just because something has not passed "phase III clinical trials" does not mean it doesn't work. It simply means someone had a lot of money to pay off the FDA. Phase III clinical trials should not be the final criterion for inclusion. Whether or not it actually works should. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Philoprof (talk • contribs) 16:56, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * No. I'm not any kind of authority on the page and I have no desire to be one. I'm just following the existing policies. Whether or not you have WP:V, WP:RS to support the statement is what matters. So far, you haven't shown ANYTHING to support your claim of synergy, let alone meeting the standard. If you can do that, there will be something to talk about. Meanwhile, please spare us the trouble of reverting your wp:spam. LeadSongDog (talk) 17:05, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Galantamine alone has passed your coveted phase III trials. Why is it such a stretch that an acetylcholine precursor coupled with an acetylcholinesterase inhibitor may be synergistic with one another?  I am by far not the first to see this.  Most of the research in this area has been on piracetam (which is another drug that should be included on the AD page).  Yet, when I tried to add it, you removed it.  Piracetam is highly effective in the treatment of Alzheimer's.  There are again plenty of studies from third party institutions showing this.  Yet, you probably don't want to include piracetam simply because it has not had "phase III clinical trials". And the primary reason it hasn't had these trials is because it can't be patented.  Big-pharma can't make any money on it.  I hope you consider other medicines in the treatment of Alzheimer's besides just what the US FDA has annoited.  Piracetam has been used for over 40 years in Europe for Alzheimer's and is extremely well tolerated and very safe. --Philoprof (talk) 17:20, 26 June 2008 (UTC)Philoprof
 * STILL nothing to support your claim of synergy. I'm sure you believe it.  You might even convince me.  That's not relevant.  To be included, like any article on WP, you need a usable source for the claim.LeadSongDog (talk) 17:25, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Of course I believe it. I have been working in this field for some time now and have a sense of what works pharmacologically.  I have tried to provide as many studies as possible.  I could spend hours and hours furnishing you with additional studies trying to convince you.  The fact of the matter is that its rather simple in the end. Acetylcholine levels in Alzheimer's patients are low.  Anything that elevates acetylcholine will help to an extent.  Its not a cure but can help for awhile.  Cholinesterase inhibitors help prevent the breakdown of acetylcholine- hence all the drugs on the market.  Acetylcholine precursors help create more acetylcholine.  Alpha GPC is probably the best acetylcholine precursor now available.  This is science and fairly well proven and documented.--Philoprof (talk) 17:36, 26 June 2008 (UTC)Philoprof

I also just wanted to add that you seem to be a person with scientific integrity and I appreciate that. Wikipedia is fortunate to have persons participating with such integrity.--Philoprof (talk) 17:48, 26 June 2008 (UTC)Philoprof
 * Thank you. I still look forward to seeing ANY usable source that documents this synergy.  It does not seem at all improbable, but we MUST have usable sources to cite.  The fact that you haven't cited any despite all these requests leads me to the inescapable inference that you don't have any that you can cite.  When that changes, I'd love to hear about it.LeadSongDog (talk) 19:02, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Here is an article I think you might find interesting: "Nicotinic Acetylcholine Receptors and Alzheimer’s Disease Therapeutics: A Review of Current Literature" at http://www.jyi.org/research/re.php?id=88

The author mentions choline alfoscerate in a section on cholinergic precursors:

Because acetylcholinesterases continuously degrade acetylcholine that is released into the synapse, cholinergic neurons must constantly synthesize acetylcholine to maintain a store of acetylcholine-containing vesicles. Cholinergic precursors are chemicals that are used to synthesize acetylcholine in neurons, and they can theoretically induce increased synthesis of acetylcholine, thus compensating for lost cholinergic activity. A similar method has been very successful in alleviating the symptoms of Parkinson’s disease caused by a loss of dopamine. Unfortunately, this therapy has not yet been as successful in Alzheimer’s disease. Its major limitation is the fact that it can only be effective where cholinergic neurons are still present. While early cholinergic precursors showed little or no benefit, a recently developed drug, choline alfoscerate, increases the release of acetylcholine in the rat hippocampus, and facilitates learning and memory in animals. While a Mexican study showed that choline alfoscerate could be an effective treatment for Alzheimer’s disease, it is not yet on the market in the U.S. (Memeron being the exception), and its future use may be limited due to the current success of other Alzheimer’s disease drugs (Doggrell and Evans 2003). --Philoprof (talk) 17:32, 2 July 2008 (UTC)Philoprof

Thanks
Hey, thanks for explicitly assuming good faith. A lot of people around here seem to have forgotten that rule. Your wikiquette is very much appreciated. I've started the merge discussion at Talk:Year. Happy editing!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 04:35, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Survey request
Hi,

I need your help. I am working on a research project at Boston College, studying creation of medical information on Wikipedia. You are being contacted, because you have been identified as an important contributor to one or more articles.

Would you will be willing to answer a few questions about your experience? We've done considerable background research, but we would also like to gather the insight of the actual editors. Details about the project can be found at the user page of the project leader, geraldckane. Survey questions can be found at geraldckane/medsurvey. Your privacy and confidentiality will be strictly protected!

The questions should only take a few minutes. I hope you will be willing to complete the survey, as we do value your insight. Please do not hesitate to contact me or Professor Kane if you have any questions.

Thank You, Sam4bc (talk) 15:16, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

MRI image in AD page
Have you seen my post on the MRI image? I saw you were looking for a while for the image permission and you could not find it finally. What do you think of my image proposal?--Garrondo (talk) 07:49, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Tagging proposal as failed
I routinely go through the list of proposals and tag some failed since they have been abandoned or if they seem to have failed based on the criteria at WP:Policies and guidelines. I don't have a strong opinion on your project and see no reason not to revert my tagging based on your good judgment. One thought is that it might be more properly worked into a manual of style, rather than a stand alone guideline. Have you advertised it at the Village pump for greater feedback? Good luck! --Kevin Murray (talk) 19:18, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Improving cites
Replied here. -- Mwanner | Talk 23:01, 28 July 2008 (UTC)