Talk:Ita Wegman

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Women's History Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles 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.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Biography This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography Medicine Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Women scientists Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women scientists, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in science 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.Women scientistsWikipedia:WikiProject Women scientistsTemplate:WikiProject Women scientistsWomen scientists Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Netherlands This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Netherlands, an attempt to create, expand, and improve articles related to the Netherlands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.NetherlandsWikipedia:WikiProject NetherlandsTemplate:WikiProject NetherlandsNetherlands

Here is what the American Cancer Society has to say about mistletoe today:

"A number of laboratory experiments suggest mistletoe may have the potential to treat cancer, but these results have not yet been reflected in clinical trials. Available evidence from well-designed clinical trials that have studied mistletoe did not support claims that mistletoe could improve length or quality of life."

http://www.cancer.org/docroot/ETO/content/ETO_5_3X_Mistletoe.asp

Here is what the National Center for Alternative and Complementary Medicine has to say (keep in mind these people are looking real hard for clinical effects, if there are any):

"Laboratory studies have found that mistletoe kills cancer cells and stimulates the immune system. The use of mistletoe to treat cancer has been studied in Europe in more than 30 clinical trials. Although improvements in survival or quality of life have been reported, almost all of the trials had major weaknesses in their design that raise doubts about the findings. For example, many of the studies had a small number of participants or did not have a control group. NCCAM is sponsoring a clinical trial of mistletoe, given in combination with the drug gemcitabine, for cancer. The study will look at toxicity, safety, and immune system effects of mistletoe extract when combined with this chemotherapy drug."

http://nccam.nih.gov/health/eurmistletoe/

In other words, it should not be suggested that mistletoe is an effective treatment for cancer. There are no studies showing this, and quite a few suggesting otherwise.DianaW 14:38, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are a large number of studies that support its effectiveness; see Anthroposophic medicine for a long list. Hgilbert (talk) 20:51, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article says she went to medical school and obtained a diploma, so was she a doctor (Dr)? Verbal chat 15:06, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

She was a medical doctor.Hgilbert (talk) 17:45, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I thought so - I was surprised it wasn't mentioned apart from saying she had a diploma. Are you sure it's an MD though? Verbal chat 18:10, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The letters are not normally used in continental Europe; this is the English-language equivalent. The Albert Schweitzer article uses "M.D." for Schweitzer, for example, simply to indicate that he was a medical doctor, though he certainly wouldn't have received a degree of that name. I'd be happy to find a better solution. Hgilbert (talk) 20:59, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's better to be accurate I feel - I know English Dr's (medical) don't like being called MDs. We could just put (Doctor of Medicine). Consultants (Mr's, not Dr's - they're more qualified...) hate it :) Verbal chat 21:42, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever seems clearest is fine. Hgilbert (talk) 22:03, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]