This MedLibrary.org supplementary page on Talk:Poliomyelitis is provided directly from the open source Wikipedia as a service to our readers. Please see the note below on authorship of this content, as well as the Wikipedia usage guidelines. To search for other content from our encyclopedia supplement, please use the form below:
Related Sponsors
 |
Poliomyelitis is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||||||
 |
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 22, 2008. | |||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team. | ||||||||
|
|||||||||
 Archives |
Contents |
Featured topics project
Here is the featured topics project that focuses around poliomyelitis. Any interested editors are welcome to join the project and help us get the first medical featured topic up and running! —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs) 00:11, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Slight contradiction
"major polio epidemics were unknown before the 20th century.....Polio had existed for thousands of years quietly as an endemic pathogen until the 1880s, when major epidemics began to occur in Europe" a contradiction as the 1880s are before the 20th century. I will change to "unknown before the late 19th century". If someone can put it better please do. Carlwev (talk) 00:47, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Extreme Bias
I feel that the section on the vaccine should at least mention the millions of people killed by it and that survived but suffer the extreme side-effects from the mercury --68.185.93.155 (talk) 03:22, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
- Fortunately or unfortunately, your feelings don't govern what goes in Wikipedia articles. Neither Pasteur Meriux Connaught's inactivated polio vaccine (IPV) nor Lederle Laboratories oral polio vaccine (OPV) contain any thimerosal (and certainly no mercury). So perhaps it's a good thing that the article doesn't mention the "millions" of people killed and suffering "extreme side-effects" from the mercury in "the vaccine", because there is no mercury in polio vaccines. - Nunh-huh 06:01, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
- I tried to be civil, but I see now that the only "facts" allowed on Wikipedia are the ones that agree with the hivemind. If you'd bothered to to your research, you'd have found that 6,543,000 people have been killed by the vaccine since its inception and another 4.3 million have been crippled or maimed by it, Get your facts straight next time before you engage in personal attacks. --68.185.93.155 (talk) 03:57, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
- You can't "personally" attack an IP number, and you've failed to note that it's you who have gotten the facts wrong: there's no mercury in polio vaccines. Our article on polio vaccines is, in fact, quite explicit about the real risks. - Nunh-huh 06:58, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
- I tried to be civil, but I see now that the only "facts" allowed on Wikipedia are the ones that agree with the hivemind. If you'd bothered to to your research, you'd have found that 6,543,000 people have been killed by the vaccine since its inception and another 4.3 million have been crippled or maimed by it, Get your facts straight next time before you engage in personal attacks. --68.185.93.155 (talk) 03:57, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Polio eradication in India
This link has a curious reason why polio is not eradicated in countries like India: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1540477,00.html =Nichalp «Talk»= 05:47, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
POV-ish sentence
Polio epidemics have crippled thousands of people...
Seems that I want to emphasize with the people who have people. Pie is good (Apple is the best) 15:29, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
- I dunno, but how about "disabled" in place of "crippled"? Jefffire (talk) 16:03, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
- I disagree, crippled is fine. The definition is "Pertaining to someone with a less than fully functional limb, or has injuries which prevent full mobility; Pertaining to any difficulty or impediment which can be likened to a crippling injury", which is very much the case in poliomyelitis. It's not really an empathy thing, it's more of a factual definition of the effects of poliomyelitis. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs) 16:28, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
- I agree with Cyclonenim. As someone who has lived with the aftereffects of polio for over 53 years, the verb "crippled" is more accurate than "disabled". Stating that an event or disease cripples someone can be an accurate statement without being offensive. What is offensive to people who are disabled is to label them as cripples. It is preferable to use the term disabled, disabled person or mobility impaired.--Dan Dassow (talk) 16:46, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
- I disagree, crippled is fine. The definition is "Pertaining to someone with a less than fully functional limb, or has injuries which prevent full mobility; Pertaining to any difficulty or impediment which can be likened to a crippling injury", which is very much the case in poliomyelitis. It's not really an empathy thing, it's more of a factual definition of the effects of poliomyelitis. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs) 16:28, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
WP:COMMONNAME?
I think the heading sums up my question. --T-rex 21:51, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
- Strongly disagree since medical articles are usually titled by their scientific name. By your logic, we should rename infectious mononucleosis to "mono" or "glandular fever".
- Additionally, 'polio' relates to the infection, 'myelitis' relates to it's effects. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs) 21:59, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, infectious mononucleosis should be changed to "mono" as the majority of people will actually recognize that title --T-rex 23:17, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
- No, it shouldn't. —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs) 23:38, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, infectious mononucleosis should be changed to "mono" as the majority of people will actually recognize that title --T-rex 23:17, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
- Most dictionaries point out that polio is merely an abbreviation of poliomyelitis and leave the definition to the longer full name. So we are not really deviating from standard practice. Encarta, for example, does the same. BTW: I have never heard of "mono" -- I'm from the UK. Colin°Talk 08:05, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
- I know, I'm British too, that's why I put "glandular fever" down too. Read infectious mononucleosis's lead :) —Cyclonenim (talk · contribs) 10:40, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
- Well apparently mono is an american thing, but I'm still pretty sure that "Polio" is internationally better known than "Poliomyelitis" --T-rex 14:49, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Comment As Cyclonenim has already noted, albeit indirectly, the current article name is consistent with Wikiepedia's Manual of Style, per Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(medicine-related_articles)#Naming_conventions. There is therefore nothing in particular to debate here. Debate 木 15:46, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia content modification information:
- This page was last modified on 29 August 2008, at 19:01.
Wikipedia Authorship and Review
Wikipedia content provided here is not reviewed directly by MedLibrary.org. Wikipedia content is authored by an open community of volunteers and is not produced by or in any way affiliated with MedLibrary.org.
Wikipedia Usage Guidelines
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article on "Talk:Poliomyelitis".
The URL for this specific entry is:
All Wikipedia text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. (See Copyrights for details). Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.