688:"Should" is not equal to "is not allowed", so this is hardly enough IMO. And what about the results on humans you threw out too? And the safety issues? Some of the statements do have more than one source to back them up so they are not to be considered light evidence. And the article clearly distinguishes the results of animal studies from the results of human studies. I still do not see the problem here. Not to be mistaken, I value your point (WP:WHYMEDRS) and I am well aware that raw data can be messy and needs approval by other experiments and scientists, but some of the claims in the article are pretty well backed up... it does not help anyone to get over this indifferently and take all such info per se out. --
342:
321:
285:
431:
233:
410:
942:
191:
247:
222:
656:. This just as examples, but all the information you want deleted reveals quite some valuable insights of the characteristics of 7-keto-DHEA. So please, plain and simple - explain why the data shall be deleted from the article as I dont get it (weird indeed, after almost 15 years of working on WP). Thank you --
653:
A 2007 study demonstrated that administration of 7-keto-DHEA to overweight adults in conjunction with a calorie-restricted diet effectively reverses the decline in resting metabolic rate (RMR) normally associated with dieting. 7-Keto-DHEA demonstrated an ability to increase RMR by 1.4% above baseline
890:
Once an editor has provided any source he or she believes, in good faith, to be sufficient, then any editor who later removes the material has an obligation to articulate specific problems that would justify its exclusion from
Knowledge (e.g. why the source is unreliable; the source does not support
592:
I just wondered why substantial information was deleted from the article. WP is a source of information and therefore infos should be in the article. There are all claims with a source, and AFAIK all these sources seem to be reputable, at least reliable. I do not understand why information about how
648:
A primary source in medicine is one in which the authors directly participated in the research or documented their personal experiences. They examined the patients, injected the rats, ran the experiments, or at least supervised those who did. Many, but not all, papers published in medical journals
572:
The study referenced "Zenk JL, Frestedt JL, Kuskowski MA (September 2007)." has an abstract which does not show the dose target of the combination treatment nor the 7-keto dhea alone. Does anyone know what the dose was in the study? I've read elsewhere (in an unsourced discussion) that 100-200mg
516:
A) One of the additions referenced a classification per WADA's ruling (World Anti-Doping Agency) that was reversed in
February 2012, but the addition only references the original ruling from 2011. I kindly ask that we acknowledge the most updated ruling and do not publish outdated information.
654:
levels and demonstrated a 5.4% increase in daily RMR when administered with a calorie-restricted diet. 7-Keto-DHEA achieves this thermogenic effect without cardiovascular or central nervous system side effects, which are commonly seen with stimulant-associated thermogenic agents.
852:
No, I am not. We agreed to look for sources, not to transform this entire article from a resourceful information into a near-stub. So I asked you politely to stick to it. Please dont vandalize and do not threaten me. I did not either of this to you. --
520:
B) One editor removed information that had been published in a reputable medical journal and replaced it with a piece of information that not only disregards all the human clinical data, but also uses WebMD as a source.
731:
The first sentence was merely a personal statement that an argument (and no, I generally dont edit that way), sorry if I wasnt clear enough and confused you. But what about my other arguments? No comment on these? --
153:
772:
It would be nice if you answered to them (thank you). BTW, many med articles rely heavily on primary sources and are still considered valuable by the community, so we should not overreact here. --
770:
And what about the results on humans you threw out too? And the safety issues? Some of the statements do have more than one source to back them up so they are not to be considered light evidence.
894:
854:
801:
773:
733:
689:
657:
594:
713:
We see this argument over and over. Generally don't edit
Knowledge in ways you "should" not, because it runs counter to the consensus about what we "should" be doing. If in doubt, check at
893:
And killing a springer.com link is highly doubtful, for example. Generally spoken: You want to look for sources? Then why not lt the claims in doubt in there like its always done? --
258:. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the
786:
Primary studies are generally not usable (whether on humans or lab animals). I am now searching for sources. This substance seems to be on the FDA's radar, which might prove useful.
651:
Information about the results of animal experiments further the cause of WP as a source of accepted information, doesn't it? Not to forget the info about the results on humans:
870:
is policy - please read it. Unsourced / unreliably sourced content may be removed from articles and any editor wanting to re-add it must supply a reliable source. Also see
911:, which is dated 2005, and therefore is a violation of Knowledge's copyright policy. I found and removed some additional material copied from that brochure as well. —
147:
800:
But are all of these in the article really only primary sources? I am not so sure. Will look into it and look for other soureces, too. Lets see what we can find. --
972:
text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of
1053:
392:
382:
1038:
642:
does state that animal studies are no viable source. Please point also out why these rat studies are not to be seen as "accepted knowledge", especially as
259:
254:
227:
1068:
1058:
491:
481:
79:
958:
358:
1048:
1007:
from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. —
85:
1063:
44:
349:
326:
898:
858:
805:
777:
737:
693:
661:
598:
1043:
705:
540:
524:
I am open to collaborative editing on this piece but hope that edits will be made with thoughtful regard to accuracy. Thank you.
617:
457:
446:
439:
415:
99:
30:
104:
20:
1033:
513:
Hi all, I saw that there were some significant changes made to the lead of this article; I'm concerned for a few reasons:
168:
74:
670:
MEDRS has, in bold text in the lede, "Primary sources should generally not be used for medical content". Maybe check out
303:
202:
135:
65:
1004:
945:
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from:
746:
What arguments? The article was crappy. Let's not make it worse, but instead try to improve it in line with the
837:. If you continue along this path your IP will likely be blocked and/or the article protected to prevent this.
984:
properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original
129:
109:
995:
for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Knowledge takes copyright violations
573:
twice a day is the dose for 7-keto dhea, while here it clearly lists the safety limit at 200mg daily. —
536:
208:
125:
532:
232:
988:
969:
965:
528:
888:
Do not take me for a fool, I am aware of WP:V, and there are unrelible sources mentioned like this:
190:
954:
175:
161:
55:
357:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
991:
from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our
949:. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored,
714:
671:
452:
70:
553:
946:
908:
1015:
919:
879:
871:
842:
791:
759:
722:
679:
629:
51:
297:
751:
643:
639:
621:
557:
616:
as found published in reliable sources. Primary rat studies are not reliable sources for
552:
I think this article needs a quick once-over with removal of primary sources, per MEDRS.
141:
593:
this substances' effects shall be kept out of WP. So I revved it for now. Meanings? --
1027:
992:
747:
609:
980:, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and
341:
320:
1008:
981:
912:
875:
838:
834:
787:
755:
718:
675:
625:
354:
953:
it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see
941:
867:
293:
24:
284:
907:
Sorry but we can't include the disputed content, because it was copied from
430:
409:
977:
649:
are primary sources for facts about the research and discoveries made.
246:
221:
1019:
923:
902:
883:
862:
846:
809:
795:
781:
763:
741:
726:
697:
683:
665:
633:
602:
582:
561:
544:
184:
15:
947:
http://www.hflsolutions.com/lo/ingredients/7KetoBrochure.pdf
909:
http://www.hflsolutions.com/lo/ingredients/7KetoBrochure.pdf
283:
957:
if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or
891:
the claim; undue emphasis; unencyclopedic content; etc.).
456:. To participate, help improve this article or visit the
160:
292:
This article was accepted on 11 May 2012 by reviewer
353:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
612:a "source of information", but rather a summary of
450:, which aims to improve Knowledge's coverage of
33:for general discussion of the article's subject.
702:PS: Not to forget, the article already has the
174:
8:
268:Knowledge:WikiProject Articles for creation
624:. I have therefore removed this material.
404:
315:
271:Template:WikiProject Articles for creation
252:This article was reviewed by member(s) of
216:
406:
317:
218:
188:
955:"using copyrighted works from others"
895:2003:F4:2BCE:4B01:F59C:1CB7:9B37:89BF
855:2003:F4:2BCE:4B01:F59C:1CB7:9B37:89BF
802:2003:F4:2BCE:4B01:F59C:1CB7:9B37:89BF
774:2003:F4:2BCE:4B01:F59C:1CB7:9B37:89BF
734:2003:F4:2BCE:4B01:F59C:1CB7:9B37:89BF
690:2003:F4:2BCE:4B01:F59C:1CB7:9B37:89BF
658:2003:F4:2BCE:4B01:F59C:1CB7:9B37:89BF
595:2003:F4:2BCE:4B01:74D7:5B1B:1EBD:24AC
7:
1054:Low-importance pharmacology articles
436:This article is within the scope of
347:This article is within the scope of
1039:AfC submissions by date/11 May 2012
207:It is of interest to the following
23:for discussing improvements to the
588:Rev Oct 2019 for "medical reasons"
367:Knowledge:WikiProject Pharmacology
14:
1069:Low-importance chemicals articles
1059:WikiProject Pharmacology articles
674:for background to this guidance.
370:Template:WikiProject Pharmacology
255:WikiProject Articles for creation
959:"donating copyrighted materials"
940:
429:
408:
340:
319:
245:
231:
220:
189:
45:Click here to start a new topic.
486:This article has been rated as
466:Knowledge:WikiProject Chemicals
387:This article has been rated as
646:clearly states the following:
469:Template:WikiProject Chemicals
1:
1049:C-Class pharmacology articles
361:and see a list of open tasks.
42:Put new text under old text.
1020:22:48, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
924:22:48, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
903:11:07, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
884:11:01, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
863:10:56, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
847:10:48, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
810:10:32, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
796:09:55, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
782:09:50, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
764:09:46, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
742:09:44, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
727:09:41, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
698:09:27, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
684:09:06, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
666:08:36, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
634:05:38, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
603:21:21, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
999:, and persistent violators
460:for details on the project.
50:New to Knowledge? Welcome!
1085:
1064:C-Class chemicals articles
993:guideline on non-free text
750:. Now, are there any good
583:16:07, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
492:project's importance scale
393:project's importance scale
936:Copyright problem removed
618:WP:Biomedical information
562:17:19, 21 June 2012 (UTC)
545:23:41, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
485:
424:
386:
335:
291:
240:
215:
80:Be welcoming to newcomers
1044:Accepted AfC submissions
976:, and, if allowed under
706:medical citations needed
444:, a daughter project of
350:WikiProject Pharmacology
638:Please point out where
833:Right, IP you are now
288:
197:This article is rated
75:avoid personal attacks
710:template at the top.
568:dose in study for RMR
447:WikiProject Chemistry
440:WikiProject Chemicals
373:pharmacology articles
287:
265:Articles for creation
262:for more information.
228:Articles for creation
100:Neutral point of view
1034:C-Class AfC articles
754:sources we can use?
105:No original research
968:, we cannot accept
614:accepted knowledge
472:chemicals articles
289:
203:content assessment
86:dispute resolution
47:
548:
531:comment added by
506:
505:
502:
501:
498:
497:
403:
402:
399:
398:
314:
313:
310:
309:
183:
182:
66:Assume good faith
43:
1076:
1013:
944:
917:
709:
580:
547:
525:
474:
473:
470:
467:
464:
433:
426:
425:
420:
412:
405:
375:
374:
371:
368:
365:
344:
337:
336:
331:
323:
316:
276:
275:
272:
269:
266:
249:
242:
241:
236:
235:
234:
224:
217:
200:
194:
193:
185:
179:
178:
164:
95:Article policies
16:
1084:
1083:
1079:
1078:
1077:
1075:
1074:
1073:
1024:
1023:
1011:
938:
915:
703:
590:
578:
575:
570:
526:
511:
509:Medical sources
471:
468:
465:
462:
461:
418:
372:
369:
366:
363:
362:
329:
273:
270:
267:
264:
263:
230:
201:on Knowledge's
198:
121:
116:
115:
114:
91:
61:
12:
11:
5:
1082:
1080:
1072:
1071:
1066:
1061:
1056:
1051:
1046:
1041:
1036:
1026:
1025:
997:very seriously
937:
934:
933:
932:
931:
930:
929:
928:
927:
926:
831:
830:
829:
828:
827:
826:
825:
824:
823:
822:
821:
820:
819:
818:
817:
816:
815:
814:
813:
812:
700:
589:
586:
576:
569:
566:
565:
564:
510:
507:
504:
503:
500:
499:
496:
495:
488:Low-importance
484:
478:
477:
475:
434:
422:
421:
419:Low‑importance
413:
401:
400:
397:
396:
389:Low-importance
385:
379:
378:
376:
359:the discussion
345:
333:
332:
330:Low‑importance
324:
312:
311:
308:
307:
290:
280:
279:
277:
250:
238:
237:
225:
213:
212:
206:
195:
181:
180:
118:
117:
113:
112:
107:
102:
93:
92:
90:
89:
82:
77:
68:
62:
60:
59:
48:
39:
38:
35:
34:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1081:
1070:
1067:
1065:
1062:
1060:
1057:
1055:
1052:
1050:
1047:
1045:
1042:
1040:
1037:
1035:
1032:
1031:
1029:
1022:
1021:
1017:
1010:
1006:
1002:
998:
994:
990:
987:
983:
979:
975:
971:
967:
966:legal reasons
962:
961:if you are.)
960:
956:
952:
948:
943:
935:
925:
921:
914:
910:
906:
905:
904:
900:
896:
892:
887:
886:
885:
881:
877:
873:
869:
866:
865:
864:
860:
856:
851:
850:
849:
848:
844:
840:
836:
811:
807:
803:
799:
798:
797:
793:
789:
785:
784:
783:
779:
775:
771:
768:I mean this:
767:
766:
765:
761:
757:
753:
749:
745:
744:
743:
739:
735:
730:
729:
728:
724:
720:
716:
712:
711:
707:
701:
699:
695:
691:
687:
686:
685:
681:
677:
673:
669:
668:
667:
663:
659:
655:
650:
645:
641:
637:
636:
635:
631:
627:
623:
619:
615:
611:
608:Knowledge is
607:
606:
605:
604:
600:
596:
587:
585:
584:
581:
567:
563:
559:
555:
551:
550:
549:
546:
542:
538:
534:
530:
522:
518:
514:
508:
493:
489:
483:
480:
479:
476:
459:
455:
454:
449:
448:
443:
442:
441:
435:
432:
428:
427:
423:
417:
414:
411:
407:
394:
390:
384:
381:
380:
377:
360:
356:
352:
351:
346:
343:
339:
338:
334:
328:
325:
322:
318:
305:
302:
299:
295:
286:
282:
281:
278:
261:
257:
256:
251:
248:
244:
243:
239:
229:
226:
223:
219:
214:
210:
204:
196:
192:
187:
186:
177:
173:
170:
167:
163:
159:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
140:
137:
134:
131:
127:
124:
123:Find sources:
120:
119:
111:
110:Verifiability
108:
106:
103:
101:
98:
97:
96:
87:
83:
81:
78:
76:
72:
69:
67:
64:
63:
57:
53:
52:Learn to edit
49:
46:
41:
40:
37:
36:
32:
26:
22:
18:
17:
1000:
996:
985:
973:
963:
950:
939:
889:
835:edit warring
832:
769:
652:
647:
613:
591:
574:
571:
527:— Preceding
523:
519:
515:
512:
487:
458:project page
451:
445:
438:
437:
388:
364:Pharmacology
355:Pharmacology
348:
327:Pharmacology
300:
274:AfC articles
260:project page
253:
209:WikiProjects
171:
165:
157:
150:
144:
138:
132:
122:
94:
19:This is the
974:information
970:copyrighted
672:WP:WHYMEDRS
533:Wordcouture
148:free images
31:not a forum
25:7-Keto-DHEA
1028:Categories
989:plagiarize
982:referenced
872:WP:NOTVAND
463:Chemicals
453:chemicals
416:Chemicals
88:if needed
71:Be polite
21:talk page
978:fair use
752:WP:MEDRS
644:WP:MEDRS
640:WP:MEDRS
622:WP:MEDRS
541:contribs
529:unsigned
304:contribs
56:get help
29:This is
27:article.
1009:Diannaa
1005:blocked
913:Diannaa
876:Alexbrn
839:Alexbrn
788:Alexbrn
756:Alexbrn
748:WP:PAGs
719:Alexbrn
676:Alexbrn
626:Alexbrn
490:on the
391:on the
199:C-class
154:WP refs
142:scholar
951:unless
715:WT:MED
610:WP:NOT
294:Pol430
205:scale.
126:Google
579:obbie
554:Yobol
169:JSTOR
130:books
84:Seek
1016:talk
1001:will
964:For
920:talk
899:talk
880:talk
868:WP:V
859:talk
843:talk
806:talk
792:talk
778:talk
760:talk
738:talk
723:talk
694:talk
680:talk
662:talk
630:talk
620:per
599:talk
558:talk
537:talk
298:talk
162:FENS
136:news
73:and
1003:be
482:Low
383:Low
176:TWL
1030::
1018:)
1012:🍁
986:or
922:)
916:🍁
901:)
882:)
874:.
861:)
845:)
808:)
794:)
780:)
762:)
740:)
725:)
717:.
708:}}
704:{{
696:)
682:)
664:)
632:)
601:)
560:)
543:)
539:•
306:).
156:)
54:;
1014:(
918:(
897:(
878:(
857:(
841:(
804:(
790:(
776:(
758:(
736:(
721:(
692:(
678:(
660:(
628:(
597:(
577:r
556:(
535:(
494:.
395:.
301:·
296:(
211::
172:·
166:·
158:·
151:·
145:·
139:·
133:·
128:(
58:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
