Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oxygen cocktail


 * 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   keep. --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 02:24, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Oxygen cocktail

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

prod tag was removed probably by article author Melaen (talk) 18:58, 26 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Can you provide a deletion rationale? "Prod tag was removed probably by article author" tells us nothing about why you think the article should be deleted. Umbralcorax (talk) 20:07, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Why should the article be deleted?
Sorry, but I don't see why my article is nominated for deletion. I have studied a lot of scientific material in Russian which explain how this drink works and which prove that it has a positive effect on the body. Numerours clinical trials have proved that tyhe oxygen cocktail can be part of oxygen therapy. All the links and references are provided. Most documents are unfortunately only in Russian but I'll try to find some info in English. And besides, the following article has not been deleted.They have a lot in common, though. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxygen_bar As far as I know one can buy oxygen cocktails in oxygen bars. Anyway, can anyone explain, why you are going to delete the article? What exactly is wrong with it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by EnJoyce (talk • contribs) 20:14, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep and rewrite -- it should be possible to rewrite this so it is encyclopedic.  Whether or not we think it effective is irrelevant. I removed a speedy G11 tag--let the AfD decide.     DGG ( talk ) 00:31, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Pseudo-science, verging on how-to guide and no evidence of notability. "Thousands of oxygen molecules" indeed - an ordinary cup of coffee contains millions of oxygen molecules! &mdash; RHaworth 09:56, 27 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but those who tell it's pseudo-science have not read the whole article. Please, do read the information about clinical trials. --EnJoyce (talk) 10:39, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
 * So which is the link to these clinical trials? &mdash; RHaworth 11:21, 27 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Here is the discription of the clinical trials and the links to them. Unfortunately all the clinical researches were held in Russia and that is why all the information is also in Russian. But that does not mean it doesn't exist:

http://www.rmj.ru/articles_3556.htm

http://o2pena.ru/article1.html

http://o2pena.ru/article6.html

http://www.pirogovka.ru/pdf/2007/09_2007.pdf

http://www.rmj.ru/articles_5521.htm

http://www.vikom-krk.com/o2/30/19-19

The gynecological department of medical rehabilitation of “Research Center of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Perinatology named after academician V.I. Kulakov” organized the research of using the oxygen cocktail as means of medical rehabilitation. Hypoxia (oxygen starvation) reflects itself in the worsening of the blood supply of tissues and systems of the body which is proved with the help of the diagnostics with ECG, rheoencephalography, rheography of the pelvic cavity and Doppler velocimetry. Hypoxia has a negative influence on fetal development during pregnancy. Lack of oxygen may lead to pathological failures in metabolism and functioning of essential parts of the fetus’ body as well as increase the likelihood of birth-related injuries.

It is proved that using the oxygen cocktails as a part of the complex therapy of the center’s patients (including children and teenagers) suffering from inflammations of uterine appendages, optimizes metabolism and reflex processes, activates antioxidants in the plasma. As a result the efficiency and psychoemotional state of the patients are improved. This is demonstrated by the numerous medico-psychological researches. Hypoxia has the negative effect on the fetal development during pregnancy.

In 2005 the Research Center of Children’s Health (Russian Academy of Medical Sciences) studied the efficiency of the oxygen cocktails as a part of the complex therapy of school and pre-school children suffering from chronic diseases of the respiratory and digestive systems and children who often have chills. During the research patients took 200 ml of the oxygen cocktail on a daily basis. The clinical researches demonstrated that the oxygen cocktail has no side effects, does not cause changes in the stool, sickness and vomiting, activates metabolism, reduces fatigue and stimulates efficiency and the immune system. All the patients suffering from pathological diseases of the respiratory system and 85% of the children suffering from diseases of the digestive tract showed improvements in the state of health. The efficiency of the oxygen cocktail used for prevention and therapy of placental insufficiency and fetal hypoxia was proved during the clinical researched organized in 2006 by the obstetrics and genecology department of the Peoples' Friendship University of Russia.--EnJoyce (talk) 12:22, 27 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Dear moderators, I have edited the article according to your suggestions. Hope this will satisfy the criteria of Wikipedia.--EnJoyce (talk) 17:15, 27 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment mine - copied from article talk page

I'm not saying the Russian stuff is rubbish - although I have a view about both oxygen bars (outside Tokyo, perhaps) and cocktails that they are both in the realm of pseudo-science (or possibly - to use the term used by New Scientist's 'Feedback' column - fruitloopery). The article is worded in a rather promotional tone. Promotional may not necessarily by advertising of a particular company, but can be of an idea. I feel the tone doesn't fit in with WP:NPOV. Apart from which, If extra oxygen was needed by people, inhaling it would be far more effective than using it by squirting a lot of it into the air in making the cocktail and swallowing the rest as froth. The carbon dioxide from beers and fizzy drinks comes up as burps - the oxygen from the cocktail is going to come up the same way. If any is absorbed in the stomach, it won't be worth the cost of all the effort involved. This is at best fringe 'complimentary medicine' to me - and I would like to see sources that show it is any more use than gold-plated power lead connections for hi-fi - or at least show that people are using it. Sources that are reliable and in English. I can cope with French at a sub-technical level, but not Russian. Stuff can be incorrect in itself but still be notable - as witness the articles about certain notable hoaxes. Whichever this is (I'm not saying that the cocktail is a non-existent hoax product...), sources we can use are needed. Peridon (talk) 21:24, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:08, 28 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Provisional keep. I was asked to comment here, but instead went ahead and quickly (within 10 min) cleaned up the article (surely, further improvement needed, so tagged). Incidentally, I can confirm first hand that the subject is real, i.e. that there was a network of Soviet medical institutions studying the effect and supplying the product. This part is encyclopedic. I can't comment whether any medical effect exists apart from placebo and bodily stimulation by a healthy drink :) Seriously, the article was rather spammy and used sources hosted by sites selling the cocktail. Those may not stay. I have/had doubts whether this article was part of a promotional campaign, but AGF it was not. Materialscientist (talk) 05:27, 29 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep - though I concur that the science of this idea is at least questionable, that is not a reason to delete - or we would have no article on homeopathy. The article may need copy-editing, NPOV improving, dubious science debunking (with RS, of course), etc, etc, but these are also not reasons to delete.  As Materialscientist notes, the subject is real, it is being applied in some form (to what result is debatable, but still), it is the subject of numerous sources.  Thus, this is definitely an encyclopedic topic - hence my !vote.  This is not an endorsement of the article in any of its drafts.  EdChem (talk) 12:24, 29 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep Meets notability standards. A quick 'news' search turned up verifiable, third party references, such as this one from 36 years ago. I am not commenting on scientific validity of the article's subject, only its notability. I agree with EdChem that this is an encyclopedic topic. Geoff  Who, me?  13:35, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I now accept that the author was not promoting commercially - I see so much spam in New Accounts that anything that looks like it's in a tin looks like it's spam.... I hope EnJoyce will accept my apologies and understand where I was coming from. As with homeopathy, there should be an article on this if it is referenced properly - and with any contra-references too, of course. (This is despite my personal view that this is another way of selling fruit juice expensively - see also Smoothie....) I would like to see references in English, and do not necessarily trust all clinical reports. It should be remembered that doctors and clinics have been known to produce reports favourable to the tobacco industry. (And on occasions, worse...) Peridon (talk) 15:17, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - Spammy in tone. My medical vocabulary in Russian is poor but I will say that I don't see any really compelling sources in the Russian language footnotes. All of them deal with the so-called "oxygen cocktail" no more than tangentially. A Google search for "Oxygen Cocktail" does return enough results that I think this probably passes muster as an encyclopedia-worthy topic (pseudo-science though it may be). Tone of this article needs to be corrected and the sourcing needs to be anglicized. BTW, Russian language footnotes should include English translations of title in parentheses, per WP standard style. Carrite (talk) 21:55, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep We're not here to judge whether the stuff works or not; we are just trying to decide if it is notable, and it clearly is. All the references at the article are in Russian but there is plenty of stuff available in English, for example St. Louis Post Dispatch 2001, Sydney Morning Herald 1986, Los Angeles Times 1977. A rewrite with English sourcing would make this an obvious keep. --MelanieN (talk) 01:05, 1 November 2010 (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.