User talk:Lvogel1/High-protein diet

Review
Good start! View your page's history to see if I made any edits or left any templates. I am concerned that the tone reads, to me at least, a bit unbalanced (i.e., advocacy). Because this is a health topic, I wanted to make sure you did the health tutorial? I'd also be curious what and  think about the tone -Reagle (talk) 17:38, 20 February 2024 (UTC)


 * @Lvogel1, I agree with the tone concern, "can ensure that individuals", "therefore a high-protein diet is favorable" .. I think when writing up medical information you don't want to give absolutes or advice. It's better to attribute the information to the review/source that you are citing.
 * Remember, Wikipedia is one of the top sites that people go to for health information, so poor information (or poorly worded), can lead to real world consequences for readers.
 * Also I want to bring attention to the following three sources:
 * https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9032/12/2/246
 * https://www.mdpi.com/2072-6643/16/1/34
 * https://www.mdpi.com/2227-9032/12/2/246
 * The publisher MDPI has a questionable reputation and is labeled by the Wikipedia community as a publisher that fails higher sourcing requirements. It's actually one of the journals that we warn to avoid for health related editing. My recommendation is to find sources that are reputable and can support the content, or remove the content. I did a quick search on this list, and was able to identify MDPI as questionable source.
 * Also your edits contain information specifically the kidney stone content under the "safety" section that clashes with the existing content in the existing article. It might be due to the source you used, but in this case, I think it's worth researching a bit more to see what the medical consensus is between high protein diet and kidney disease. Brianda (Wiki Ed) (talk) 22:11, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much for this advice! I will definitely work on the tone and finding better sources than the MDPI journal. Lvogel1 (talk) 01:16, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @Brianda (Wiki Ed), thanks for catching those MDPI sources. @Lvogel1, thank you for the edits. A few thoughts:
 * I still see that Pavlidou et. al is an MDPI source.
 * On the surface, the tone is much better, but I am concerned about the nunance required of the research. For example, you write "Milk and dairy products can delay cognitive decline and Alzheimer’s disease. Studies have shown that consuming milk and whey protein lead to an enhancement in memory. Generally high-protein diet can lead to less “Aβ burden in the brain,” a molecule known to cause Alzheimer’s disease." I'm no expert, but this too strong claim for the research, from what I can discern.
 * This 2018 meta-analysis of three cohort studies showed no significant association between milk intake and cognitive decline. 
 * This 2018 study suggests specific components of dairy products might promote healthy brain function during aging but did not identify the underlying mechanisms. 
 * This 2016 meta-analysis suggested milk intake may reduce the risk of cognitive impairment by modifying neurovascular dysfunction, reducing weight, and mitigating metabolic risks but called for large prospective studies to quantify potential dose-response patterns of milk intake. 
 * This 2022 study found higher cheese intake was associated with a lower risk of incident dementia but not other dairy or meat products, suggesting cheese, specifically, might have a protective effect but not other dairy or proteins. 
 * A 2023 large-scale cohort study found that soy milk consumers showed a lower risk of Alzheimer's disease, but the association was not significant for vascular dementia. 
 * Consequently, a better claim might be: "some research shows evidence of an inverse association between cheese, and perhaps dairy, consumption and certain types of cognitive decline, though the evidence is mixed and the mechanisms are not well known." You'd then want to unpack the specifics of the sources. This level of work would be required for each claim. What I'd suggest, and I'd defer to @Brianda's experience and expertise, is that:
 * to work on a medical/health claim, do so piece-meal. By that I mean, continue to develop a claim on your draft and ask for feedback on the Mainspace article's Talk page before porting your prose to Mainspace.
 * The "Meat Influencer" section is a less risky topic and would be easier to proceed on, if you want to develop that further. I'd like to see it filled out and have two more sources before porting that over. Perhaps:
 * https://www.wbur.org/endlessthread/2024/01/19/meat-carnivore-diet
 * https://www.bonappetit.com/story/carnivore-diet-lion-diet-animal-based-diet
 * Feel free to discuss in our next class! -Reagle (talk) 21:00, 28 February 2024 (UTC)