Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Micro-Chinese Medicine Osmotherapy


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. -- Cirt (talk) 19:55, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Micro-Chinese Medicine Osmotherapy

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Micro-Chinese Medicine Osmotherapy no sourcing that meets WP:MEDRS and no additional sources found though google scholar or google books. Fails WP:GNG The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 14:07, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:30, 17 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. This reads like a bad machine translation of an advertisement for this treatment.  Parts of the text defy any attempt to make sense of it: Kidney Disease is considered as one of the most difficult disease that can be controlled or treated, which makes medicine scientists feel so agonizing..... Kidney is such a precise organ that normal medicine macromolecular composition can not enter into inside kidney effectively, which means low medicine utilization. While Micro-Chinese Medicine Osmotherapy micronized medicine into very tiny micromolecule which can enter into inside kidney easier which can produce high medicine utilization, playing more effective role in repairing kidney. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:30, 17 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:MEDRS, apart from anything else. Machine-translated spam, by the look of it. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:16, 17 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. I agree that it's probably machine translated. I don't agree that it makes no sense. It clearly claims that there is some kind of barrier that makes standard [Chinese?] medicines ineffective in that they don't reach the kidney. So they are using [Chinese?] medicines with smaller molecule sizes, which are not affected by the barrier. However, this sounds pretty suspicious to me. Our kidney article doesn't mention such a property of this organ. I am sure someone from WikiProject Medicine will comment sooner or later. The reason for my vote: Maybe it's a reasonable topic. But this is certainly not the start for a reasonable article. It's just advertising for a clinic. Hans Adler 17:27, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. Molecules are defined by their molecular geometry.  You can't make them smaller without turning them into different molecules.  To the extent that the article intelligibly claims otherwise, it would be an obvious hoax; which makes me wonder whether that was the claim it intended to make.  - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:59, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Of course you can't make molecules smaller. (Except for huge molecules which can actually be folded, but I am sure it has nothing to do with their claims.) Looking for contradictions by reading everything in the most absurd way possible is not particularly helpful. Hans Adler 18:15, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * What I see here is a claim that theirs is ineffective in the kidney because it has "macro" molecules. Ours gets into the kidney and works better because it has "micro" molecules.  If this means something, it's obvious advertising.  If it doesn't, it's patent nonsense. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 04:27, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.