Talk:Ascariasis

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ascariasis article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Ascariasis.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

Medicine: Translation Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Translation task force (assessed as High-importance).

Sanitation High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sanitation, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sanitation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SanitationWikipedia:WikiProject SanitationTemplate:WikiProject Sanitationsanitation articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Could be

Could be the ascariasis make typhoid fever?

Typhoid fever is caused by a bacterium, not a worm. See typhoid fever. Dave (talk)

Merger

I am seriously against merging this article with the article about the pathogen which causes this disease. A disease and a pathogen are distinct things, and should be treated as such, as is the standard for other infectious disease articles. OcciMoron 17:01, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A Disease of?...

I redirected here from Large roundworm of pigs which said that "Ascaris suum is a parasitic nematode that causes Ascariasis in pigs" - meanwhile the top of This page says "Ascariasis is a human disease"...

Clarification? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.71.82.44 (talk) 12:10, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree.88.230.22.89 (talk) 06:12, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ascaris Lumb. is Human parasites. Ascaris Suum is Swine parasites.88.232.147.199 (talk) 18:41, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rather show the life cycle image as lead image and not the Ascaris photo as lead image?

I don't think it makes sense to use the same Ascaris photo on this page and also on the Ascaris page. If this page is meant to be about the disease then I would either show a disease photo (photo inside of the human body for example) or the life cycle image (which is currently futher down). The same will apply to the other pages on helminths. I actually think the life cycle image should in each case appear on both pages: the page about the organism (this is the organism's way of life) and on the page of the disease (this is how it infects humans). Do others agree? EvM-Susana (talk) 12:36, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No strong position about the lead image. Image of the worm can go lower if you wish. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:17, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So we concluded to put a life cycle schematic on both pages (i.e. on the organism page and the disease page) but to use two different representations where we have them available: one from CDC and one from Catarina in Mexico (UNAM). EvM-Susana (talk) 23:28, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We should have the image in the infobox. And typically we just have one image in the lead. Have thus moved the other down. The caption is a little long for the life cycle. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 09:27, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I thought we had agreed to have a different image in the lead for Ascariasis compared to Ascaris? Have henced replaced the image. The larva and egg is much more characteristic for the disease (the adult worm cannot multiply in the human body)EvM-Susana (talk) 22:16, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But why delete that image altogether? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:55, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted it because in my opinion we should not repeat the same image on the organism page and on the disease page. I have an alternative image of Ascaris which I could upload and replace that one with. For a disease that is affecting 2-3 billion people (helminthiasis), we have a disappointingly low number of photos of the organism and of the damage that it causes in people's bodies! I think more and different photos would help to attract more attention to this problem. EvM-Susana (talk) 13:50, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes as we have such a poor number of photos of many conditions we often use the same images across both pages. If you have another equally good image of the organism happy to use it here or the other page :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:36, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, done. Replaced it with a photo from Mexico. EvM-Susana (talk) 09:28, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to remove two pieces from the US

I am suggesting to remove this sentence (or indicate that a reference is needed) (I don't know how to do this): One study indicated that the prevalence of ascariasis in the United States at about 4 million (2%).

And I suggest to remove this as it's an isolated incidence and basically irrelevant:

Society and culture[edit source | editbeta] In Canada in 1970, a postgraduate student tainted his roommates' food with Ascaris suum. Four of the people became seriously ill; two of these had acute respiratory failure.[29]

Sure Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:09, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done.

Thanks :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 10:16, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chased down the 2% infection in the US citation, it appears to be this study: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2011640 However, the study is quite dated at this point (over 25 years) and is unlikely to be accurate on the subject of infection now. I've removed the line entirely. 38.84.37.162 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:52, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Moved information to here from the organism article Ascaris lumbricoides

I have just moved information to here from the organism article Ascaris lumbricoides. Now we still need to check if this has introduced repetition. I don't understand why people working on the organism page keep insisting that it should include information on diagnosis and treatment which are clearly medical topics and not "microbiology topics", see talk page of Ascaris lumbricoides. Why would people be keen to double up the information on two pages? EvMsmile (talk) 01:10, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mostly repeated. Also we do not give medication doses so I have removed it. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 13:09, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative Medicine

Wanted to get some input on this... The "Alternative Medicine" section makes statements regarding the effectiveness of unproven treatments; at least that's how it seems. Can anyone provide solid evidence of these statements? If there is proof, the treatments are no longer (or shouldn't be, anyway) "alternative". If not, I'd suggest they be removed or modified to emphasize the lack of proof. Mostly because the information is incorrect; but moreover, I don't want someone affected by this to see it and delay proper treatment. Thanks Shamalamadingdomg (talk) 10:48, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Santonin seems to be an obsolete treatment, not alternative in the sense it's normally understood. It may well be effective but it has serious side effects, which are not exhibited by current treatments. Pchown (talk) 11:12, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you, User:Shamalamadingdomg. I have changed the title of that section, but I don't understand why it is separated from the other medicines. Is it because they are not recommended by WHO? All three have the same reference (some text book), perhaps obsolete? Then we should say "formerly used medications"??. Another consideration is weather this should be moved to the article about helminthasis perhaps, unless it is specific for Ascariasis? EMsmile (talk) 19:56, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

term: infestation instead of infection

Should the term "infestation" be used instead of "infection" ? - 85.233.9.44 05:21, 27 September 2021

I (weakly) agree. Technically that should be the term in all cases of a multicellular parasite, if I'm remembering correctly. However it's common to say it the wrong way even in professional contexts in my experience. You can change it but I don't care enough to bother. Invasive Spices (talk) 21:59, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An X-ray as the lead image?

Not sure that the current X-ray image, interesting as it is when studied closely, "works" as a lead image, not least because when it pops up over a wikilink to this page, it appears as a small blurry incomprehensible smudge. I'd suggest swapping it out for one of the other images in the article, say the first image in the main text. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:42, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]