213.81.123.131 (talk) I don't know ethither, mate.~~~~ |
MyMoloboaccount (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 197: | Line 197: | ||
I don't know ethither, mate.[[Special:Contributions/213.81.123.131|213.81.123.131]] ([[User talk:213.81.123.131|talk]]) 10:53, 10 June 2011 (UTC) |
I don't know ethither, mate.[[Special:Contributions/213.81.123.131|213.81.123.131]] ([[User talk:213.81.123.131|talk]]) 10:53, 10 June 2011 (UTC) |
||
== Poor hygiene standards in Germany to blame reports Deutsche Welle == |
|||
According to this poor hygiene standards in Germany likely contributed to the spread of the problem in Germany[http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,15141816,00.html] only 40% of German adults wash their hands more than once per day which is recommended during fight against spread E.coli |
|||
--[[User:MyMoloboaccount|MyMoloboaccount]] ([[User talk:MyMoloboaccount|talk]]) 11:05, 10 June 2011 (UTC) |
Revision as of 11:05, 10 June 2011
- Archives
Talk:2011 E. coli O104:H4 outbreak/Archives/2011/June
This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title
Should this be called the 2011 E. coli outbreak? For instance, the 1993 outbreak at Jack in the box also caused H-U-S, but it's commonly referred to as an E. coli outbreak, usually in the context of needing better food safety (such as in the book Fast Food Nation). People know what E. coli is. I'm just thinking that people would recognize the word E. coli more than "hemolytic-uremic syndrome". hbdragon88 (talk) 01:44, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
Try the 2011 Escherichia coli O104:H4 outbreak?Wipsenade (talk) 16:14, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
- Moved. Additionally, this may not be a hemolytic disease, according to a person on the Escherichia coli O104:H4 talk page. Speciate (talk) 18:14, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
- What's wrong with 2011 E. coli outbreak? Are there other E coli outbreaks that we have to disambiguate from? Surely "E. coli" is the common name, and not "Escherichia coli". 137.82.175.12 (talk) 18:21, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
- E. coli is present everywhere. Trillions of them are inside you right now. The O104:H4 strain is what is causing disease. By consensus, medical articles on Wikipedia are exempted from WP:COMMONNAME. That said, I don't much care if the article is called 2011 Escherichia coli O104:H4 outbreak or 2011 E. coli O104:H4 outbreak. Speciate (talk) 18:28, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
- I just moved the page without reading the talk page, because I am a dunce. I have reread WP:MEDMOS though, and I see nothing that would prevent us from having 2011 E. coli outbreak as the article title. And although this is an WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument, we do have 2008 United States salmonellosis outbreak, which has stayed stable at that title for three years now. NW (Talk) 20:39, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
- I support 2011 E. coli outbreak due to it being the most commonly used name (it has nearly 7 million results in Google compared with "2011 E. coli O104:H4 outbreak", which has 3370). It is also much more easier to read as a short, simple title which conveys the meaning perfectly (especially as there is a date). EryZ (talk) 05:17, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
- Try 2011 E. coli O104:H4 outbreak or 2011 European E. coli O104:H4 outbreak ?Wipsenade (talk) 09:39, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
New title?
So it's been reported now that this is a new super-toxic strain of E. coli. [1] Wondering if we should go for the generic 2011 E. coli outbreak title. hbdragon88 (talk) 23:38, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- Because E. coli are not undergoing any kind of outbreak, E. coli O104:H4 are. E. coli are everywhere, they are part of the natural gut biota of mammals. Because such reports, by news media interested in selling advertising, run afoul of consensus at Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine). Because a lab in China does a rapid preliminary sequencing, and for publicity's sake made an announcement, does not mean that this is not O104:H4. Reading the press release, they say it is O104, but make no statement regarding the H-antigen. The strain is not new, it has been known to be enteroaggregative since at least 2001; [2] Speciate (talk) 00:43, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
I somehow missed the enteroaggregative mention from 2001, the only human pathogen notation I found was from a Korean woman in 2005. That said, the antigens match, but the genetics, as released yesterday, do not match, but show a new strain, secondary to horizontal transfer of genetic materiel. The press loves to run away with the new "Superbug" of the week, it sells their news product, at the cost of valid facts that can be confirmed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.139.16.223 (talk) 04:35, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Hum?82.14.57.233 (talk) 14:54, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Is Wikipedia a Newspaper?
I regret that this article does not apply to Wikipedia_is_not_a_newspaper. Why can't all the authors add their contributions to WikiNews? --94.103.200.245 (talk) 22:00, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
- Sometimes it is. Please have a look at the template on top of this article, stating that "This article documents a current event. Information may change rapidly as the event progresses", and then go to this link: Portal:Current events. You're welcome.
Zack Holly Venturi (talk) 00:11, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- But not to reverse enciclopedic information to daily information.--Looc20 (talk) 18:55, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- So let's kick Wikipedia_is_not_a_newspaper into the trashcan, or what? --22:36, 4 June 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.103.200.245 (talk)
EXCELLENT work on the matrix/color codes! It made the map instantly understandable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.139.16.223 (talk) 04:25, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
C.P. Grogan?82.14.57.233 (talk) 14:51, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Map
That's something you won't pin on Greece that easily, by looking at the map. --212.54.216.56 (talk) 16:40, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
I agree, long live Greece! Greece.Wipsenade (talk) 18:41, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Misleading map
The map, which highlights Germany and all other EU countries is misleading. In fact, as the article states correctly, only 10 European countries plus USA are affected. I suggest to use a world map that highlights only those countries that have reported cases.--spitzl (talk) 16:02, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
I have alredy started one.Wipsenade (talk) 16:35, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
- Excellent. May I suggest to distinguish between "local cases" and "imported cases"? Given the infection does not spread from person to person, it seems reasonable to distinguish between countries that have reported local cases (Germany) and countries that have only imported infections through travelers that have been in Germany recently (Spain, Sweden, Netherlands, UK, USA). In the case of Denmark, Switzerland and Poland it is imho unclear, whether they also have local infections.--spitzl (talk) 17:35, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
I'll do that some time tomorrow. :-). Wipsenade (talk) 19:15, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
DoneWipsenade (talk) 19:50, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
- That was quick, thanx. Can I give you a last suggestion? Instead of brown color, use a medium dark grey to indicate countries with no cases but "Food sale/trade restrictions/ran tests". Running a test is not a sever measure. Therefore it shouldn't have such a strong color.--spitzl (talk) 22:47, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
- It was partly done anyway, so it was quick. Another user was browned off by the brown and scrapped it. A new globalised map will occur soon, now that the UAE and Nigeria are involved. 16:37, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
- Got it. Two more things I noticed. 1) Emotionally the dark gray color is still too obtrusive, given that these countries did not register a single case but merely did some tests or introduced restrictions. 2) The data refers to countries but the map shows regions too. So the map seems to tell us that there have been cases in each region, which is not the case. A solution would be to either get rid of the regional borders or to color only those regions where cases have been found. Cheers, --spitzl (talk) 09:16, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
- It was partly done anyway, so it was quick. Another user was browned off by the brown and scrapped it. A new globalised map will occur soon, now that the UAE and Nigeria are involved. 16:37, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
I was thinking about the region thing to, but not the grey.Wipsenade (talk) 14:49, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
A colour code change is imminent.Wipsenade (talk) 17:08, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
- I'm afraid the map is more difficult to grasp after the latest change. The new brown tones now compete with the orange tones that indicate native cases. Visually you can't tell the difference between these very different labels. Replacing the original dark gray with a lighter gray would have done the job.--spitzl (talk) 22:54, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Like the new 'poofy tint' mauve and lilac tints?Wipsenade (talk) 10:54, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Map accuracy
It is labeled with spanish cucumbers, it might not be accurate for current info — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.174.37.129 (talk) 00:02, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
It's not called that any more!86.24.12.123 (talk) 16:45, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Map box
could anybody please fix the mapbox or move it to a seperate section becouse it gets capped off becouse theres too mutch info in it. thanks Hybirdd (talk · contribs · count · email) 14:50, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
A restaurant in Lübeck, Germany.
On June 4, German and EU officials had allegedly been examining data that indicated that restaurant in Lübeck, Germany, as a possible starting point of the on-going deadly E coli outbreak in Europe. [[3]][[4]]Wipsenade (talk) 16:45, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
- I had got the impression it was a catered event in Lübeck that was suggested as the point of origin. Speciate (talk) 18:50, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
- In fact its possiboly on part of a farm in Ulzen, near Hamburg.86.24.10.255 (talk) 16:15, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- I was not!82.14.57.233 (talk) 14:51, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Neutrality
Which of the above discussions prompted the neutrality tag on the article? Could the title of the discussion be enhanced to indicate it is the Neutrality discussion??? --- This section can then be deleted. Regards, Ariconte (talk) 07:54, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
- My thoughts exactly. Let's give it until tomorrow and remove it if no reply by then.--Asteriontalk 08:55, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Not suspected , it is erroneous. The information of positive test (without results of ongoing tests) provided by the German authorities was corrected later.[5]--Looc20 (talk) 14:27, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
Doggerel. 82.2.66.62 (talk) 16:18, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
"NPOV"
I'm not going to get into semantics about what constitutes NPOV, but comparing these two versions of the opening header: one and two, I would say that there is no detriment to NPOV in the second one, which is the version I believe to be just better written.
One:
German officials gave erroneous information of the origin and strain of Escherichia coli. German health authorities, without results of ongoing tests, initially linked serotype O104 to cucumbers imported from Spain. They later recognised that Spanish greenhouses were not the source of E. coli and cucumber samples did not show the specific E. coli variant seen in the outbreak. Spain consequently expressed anger about having its produce linked with the deadly E. coli outbreak, which cost Spanish exporters 200m USD per week. Russia has banned the import of all fresh vegetables from the European Union.
Two:
German health authorities, pending results of ongoing tests, initially suspected cucumbers imported from Spain had been the source of the outbreak of E. coli. They later recognised that Spanish greenhouses were not the source of E. coli and cucumber samples did not show the specific E. coli variant seen in the outbreak. Spain consequently expressed anger about having its produce linked with the deadly E. coli outbreak, which cost Spanish exporters 200m USD per week. Russia has banned the import of all fresh vegetables from the European Union.
For one thing, in the first version above, the same thing is said twice in different ways, which is just redundant. In the second version, the syntax is clearer. In fact, I would say that the second version is more "NPOV" in that it avoids the emotional baggage of the language in the first version. Thoughts? Gammondog (talk) 22:44, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
- No emotional baggage. "Suspected"[6] is not equal to "Erroneous". The information of positive test (without results of ongoing tests) provided by the German authorities was corrected later. You can see here [7]. Fell free to improve sintaxis,semantics,etc but not remove NPOV. --Looc20 (talk) 23:42, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry, Looc20, what exactly do you mean? How exactly does NPOV require us to attribute blame? --86.80.31.101 (talk) 23:44, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
- what blame? I talk about a erroneous information (serotype 0104 confirmed! not suspected). See references not delete it.--Looc20 (talk) 00:00, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- It's clear from what's written later that they were wrong. No need to say it twice. I disapprove of being referred to as a vandal (cf., here), btw. --86.80.31.101 (talk) 00:08, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- Do not delete references please.[8]Im sorry but is the second.[9]--Looc20 (talk) 00:19, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- Is English your first language? From the way you're writing here it would appear not to be - that's not a criticism butin that case then you wouldn't be able to see just how much more emotionally charged the version you insist is "more NPOV" actually is. As for the difference between "erroneous" and "suspected", the way you argue it makes it seem as if the Germans released wrong information on purpose, which is clearly not the case. Gammondog (talk) 12:05, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- Do not delete references please.[8]Im sorry but is the second.[9]--Looc20 (talk) 00:19, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- It's clear from what's written later that they were wrong. No need to say it twice. I disapprove of being referred to as a vandal (cf., here), btw. --86.80.31.101 (talk) 00:08, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- what blame? I talk about a erroneous information (serotype 0104 confirmed! not suspected). See references not delete it.--Looc20 (talk) 00:00, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry, Looc20, what exactly do you mean? How exactly does NPOV require us to attribute blame? --86.80.31.101 (talk) 23:44, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
No I can not see how emotionally is "erroneous". But you can see how erroneous is "suspected" here [10],
German authorities information on May 27:
- (a) Organic cucumbers from Malaga distributed to DE and DK, serotype 0104 confirmed
- (b) Non-organic cucumber from Almeria distributed to DE, serotype 0104 confirmed
- (c) Cucumber from NL or DK (distributor not sure): suspicion, result serotyping expected on Monday
"Suspicion" [11] is equal to "Suspected"[12]. But it is not equal to the information of serotype 0104 Confirmed [13] (without results of ongoing tests) provided by the German authorities, that was corrected later, on May 31. With English as my first language or not.--Looc20 (talk) 14:53, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Hi guys, I would rather not getting drawn into a third-party content dispute but here is my proposal to both of you. It may be wise if you ask for more opinions (ie RfC, etc). Thanks, --Asteriontalk 02:18, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Three:
German health authorities, pending conclusive test results, incorrectly stated at first that cucumbers imported from Spain had been the source of the E. coli outbreak. They later admitted that Spanish greenhouses were not the source of E. coli and that none of the cucumber samples had indeed shown the specific E. coli variant seen in the outbreak. Spain consequently expressed anger about having its produce linked with the deadly E. coli outbreak, which cost Spanish exporters 200m USD per week. Russia has banned the import of all fresh vegetables from the European Union.
- Yeh, agreed.86.24.10.255 (talk) 16:12, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Cite check
I have added the {{cite check}} tag because I found at least two cites that were not properly summarised in the article. I suspect the rush of editing has resulted in these text-cite mismatches, and that there may be more. I only looked at cites numbered 7,8,9,10,11 and 22. Furthermore the FT cite is behind some kind of paywall, and this europa link returns an error page. -84user (talk) 09:25, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
I noticed the FT newspaper cite had pay-wall subscription thing to! 82.11.107.84 (talk) 11:34, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
Precautions
I move that the whole section Precautions be deleted for the following reasons:
- whatever is described is general advice in avoiding bacterial food poisoning, since whoever is offering the advice, experts and laypeople alike, did so without actually knowing any specifics about the outbreak (like what kind of food got contaminated in what way), and so it is obviously not specific to the topic of this article;
- the section is subject to a slow and lame edit war;
- Wikipedia is not a how-to guide on avoiding food poisoning.
--Lambiam 13:08, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
- I came to the talk page to make a similar suggestion. Particularly the information about copper disinfection seems (near-)original research. The section on international responses should already cover the official recommendations issued by several governmental organizations. GoEThe (talk) 14:29, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
It's stultifyingly boareing!86.24.10.255 (talk) 16:12, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
******Aviva!82.2.66.62 (talk) 09:28, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
Spreading?
I hear there's a case of this in Canada now Pyromania153 (talk) 13:36, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
I'm Googling ut up for you. :-)Wipsenade (talk) 14:42, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
I think it's type 'Escherichia coli O157:H7' not 'O104:H4'.Wipsenade (talk) 14:45, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
European Comission support
Dacian Ciolos has decided to support the foreign farmers with 210 million euros. I agree with the support to Spanish farmers, but with what arguments the supporter is European Comission and not the contributer: Germany? Watti Renew (talk) 16:35, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
The UK (until it's economic collapse in 2008), Austria, Sweden, Finland and the Netherlands also help pay the EU's bills and get little back!Wipsenade (talk) 09:42, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
What type of beans sprouts?
There are lots of beans that sprout, but does anyone know what type of beans sprouts are contaminated? Autorodents, transform and squeak out! (talk) 10:37, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
I don't know ethither, mate.213.81.123.131 (talk) 10:53, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Poor hygiene standards in Germany to blame reports Deutsche Welle
According to this poor hygiene standards in Germany likely contributed to the spread of the problem in Germany[14] only 40% of German adults wash their hands more than once per day which is recommended during fight against spread E.coli --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 11:05, 10 June 2011 (UTC)