Talk:Morgellons

Latest comment: 5 days ago by SandyGeorgia in topic Name origin


Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 22 September 2023

edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Greetings. Your entry on Wiki for Morgellons does not include the most current, fact based and peer-reviewed information. You present this information as a delusional parasitosis, but it has been in fact proven to have basis in medical fact. I want you to include more information on your site and present a more balanced and accurate picture of the current understanding of Morgellons.

Although Morgellons was previously thought to be delusional parasitosis, more recent studies have found it to be substantiated and associated with spirochete infection and tickborne illness such as Lyme Disease.

<ref>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7012249<ref>

<ref>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5811176/<ref>

<ref>https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/morgellons-disease#summary<ref>

I therefore ask that you kindly include the above information and add it to the Wiki page in order to present correct, current and relevant information on this misunderstood and previously misdiagnosed disease.

Thank you. 2601:1C2:4C00:FFA0:3DEC:CD4:61AF:C864 (talk) 14:28, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply

No. Middelveen's works have been requested many times before. Check the archives to find why they were rejected. --Hob Gadling (talk) 14:51, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
i believe that people are going to keep dumping this dude here until you add a citation o his work somewhere in the body of the wiki... maybe a unreliable research section? 99.69.134.61 (talk) 19:36, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply
I have no quarrel with the decision not to include her work, but let's at least get it right that Dr. Middelveen, whose work I have no credentials to assess, is a woman. :) 208.99.255.70 (talk) 16:00, 29 March 2024 (UTC)Reply
Read WP:FRINGE on how to handle such stuff. --Hob Gadling (talk) 08:07, 7 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
And more generally, read Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine). Wikipedia does not cite arbitrary primary-source studies as a means to contradict existing scientific consensus, and regarding medical topics, bases content on systematic reviews etc. AndyTheGrump (talk) 14:56, 22 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
Thank you! It's time we are taken serious so we can get to the root of what, why, how and a cure for the millions out there suffering because no one believed us. As far as the study done by the CDC.... wouldn't be the first time they been caught telling lies! 45.8.19.247 (talk) 03:52, 14 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
Scientists don't believe people, they believe evidence. tgeorgescu (talk) 04:15, 14 June 2024 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 4 December 2023

edit

Morgellons is not a "delusional disease".

"Evidence indicates that keratinocytes are the most likely source of the “mysterious” Morgellons fibers, and that these fibers are likely composed of keratin."

From the National Library of Medicine: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3257881/#:~:text=Evidence%20indicates%20that%20keratinocytes%20are,are%20likely%20composed%20of%20keratin. 24.205.110.222 (talk) 13:49, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Not done See the Archives, this has been discussed repeatedly. — The Hand That Feeds You:Bite 14:10, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

Denialism

edit

Scientists believe what they want to believe just like everyone else they believed evidence they would come to the consensus that this is not always psychosis especially all the information presented here phttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5811176/ 172.56.152.214 (talk) 16:19, 25 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

The Middelveen paper has been mentioned many times. It was never found convincing. tgeorgescu (talk) 17:08, 25 July 2024 (UTC)Reply

Name origin

edit

[Corrected my post] Can the section on where the name comes from be put earlier into the article, please? Or even a more prominent position. I came here to find that out, and it was not easy to find.

2A00:23EE:1748:5E5C:34A9:22FF:FEF5:BA0 (talk) 16:02, 24 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

How's that? Putting all of that detail in to the WP:LEAD would be too much, so I've created a separate section linked from the lead, making it more prominent. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:45, 24 August 2024 (UTC)Reply