This is an archive of past discussions about Bed bug. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
I just removed a link, added questionably as a reference, to "thebedbugresource.com", which redirects a visitor to another site which, not only has a somewhat suspicious URL but (according to Google) hosts malware. – ClockworkSoul22:39, 13 January 2010 (UTC)
I don't agree with the comment about blogs not being reliable sources. Some blogs host comments by known professionals in the area who are authorities and those comments are very valuable.
a fixation on peer reviewed publications is nonsensical as there are many reliable sources and some of these are blogs. Anecdotal information is also useful if it describes specific situations that are certainly possible even if not in a peer reviewed publication.
HYou don't have to be NY Times or JAMA to know what you are talking about. Sometimes these "reliable sources" can be downright ignorant if they have not checked the facts.
~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.206.33.120 (talk) 01:02, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
WP:SPS says, "Self-published material may be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications." This seems to perfectly fit the case of a published entomologist posting on a blog, provided that the person's identity is clearly established. --Dan Wylie-Sears 2 (talk) 04:40, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
Cannot develop a resistance
The text "...diatomaceous earth as an environmentally friendly non-toxic insecticide to which the bedbugs cannot develop a resistance" cannot be correct. Of course they can develop a resistance to this! All that needs to happen is that a partly ineffective treatment allows the stronger to survive and breed and thus produce offspring that will tend to be more resistant than the previous population. Repeating this over many generations would produce resistance. I think the sentence should be limited to "...diatomaceous earth as an environmentally friendly non-toxic insecticide". But finally, I think this also needs a citation. Mgwalker (talk) 20:49, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
As I understand the mechanism for DE, bed bugs would have to evolve into something other than an insect in order to evolve resistance. Technically, you're correct, if there are enough generations. However, that might be thousands of years in this case. Yakushima (talk) 05:43, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
the possibility of some resistance to DE or silica gel is not the usual resistance either at cellular or behavioural levels, but there have been reports of resistant bed bugs actuallhy having thicker exoskeletons which could confer some potential resistance to DE or SG, but so far no researcher has ever reported a strain that survives DE or SG, though there may be some differences... both SG and DE act in a mechanical fashion, though some formulations do have pyrethrins in the material which help to kill by the contact the dusts enable.173.206.33.120 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:06, 28 September 2010 (UTC).
Bleach?
Neither of these approaches is a good idea. Bleach is very irritating and has very little if any residual action.. Baking soda is useless.
for self help, there are a lot of other things you can do.. vacuuming , steam treatment, (some steamers are very reasonable in price.. handhelds are USELESS. ) DE used carefully in outlets and cracks and crevices, not as a dust everywhere.. not good for anyone..
buy some leg protectors and matress and box spring encasements, and get a good professional firm to do the heavy duty stuff..
173.206.33.120 (talk)
I wonder if spraying Clorox on infested areas will kill them. Anyone try it? I'm going to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 169.133.253.21 (talk • contribs) 19:04, 12 April 2010
Verification of the current public health threat is needed. For example, see: Goddard J, DeShazo R "Bed bugs (Cimex lectularius) and clinical consequences of their bites" JAMA 2009; 301: 1358-1366.
The photo on “traumatic insemination” seems odd.
Biology
The section Names, under the heading Bites, would fit better in this section.
Moved to intro and abbreviated. "History" (specific to English-speaking countries) might be a better section, though. Yakushima (talk) 05:53, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
More general references are needed. References 6 and 7 seem like primary references and should be replaced. Reference 7 is broken.
More references are needed. Some sentences again seem speculative and only opinion without proper citation. (e.g., Bedbugs thrive in places with high occupancy, such as hotels). Eliminated Yakushima (talk) 16:13, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
More statistics without proper citation in this section.
Under Global resurgence, it would be interesting to have a brief summary on the EPA’s National Bed Bug Summit from 2009.
The sentence: The result of a recurrent bedbug infestation can prove dispiriting, disheartening, demoralizing, and even depressing to households that may have already gone great lengths (in expense, labor, treatment, containment measures, lost furniture, etc.) to try and contain an infestation. is an opinion and should be removed.
Questionable original research here, at least in one instance: Szalanski, Allen L., James W. Austin, Jackie A. McKern, C. Dayton Steelman, and Roger E. Gold. 2008.Mitochondrial and Ribosomal Internal Transcribed Spacer 1 Diversity of Cimex lectularius (Hemiptera: Cimicidae). Journal of Medical Entomology 45(2): 229–236.
Total elimination (rather than trimming) seems excessive here. And I'm not sure I understand the objection anway. Was the content a WP:NOR violation per se? Or was it that the research cited was questionable? (I.e., that Journal of Medical Entomology is somehow not RS?) I'm always concerned whenever wholesale deletion takes RS citations with it, considering the amount of work citations require (and how poorly referenced many WP articles are.) Yakushima (talk)
I have eliminated the guide on travelling: As exposed by the reviewer it was quite obvious, most info was already in article and was quite unencyclopedic. Additionally it was completely written as a "how to guide.
In addition I have eliminated the "current research section": It was more than 4 paragraphs on how 2 US universities study bugs. I am quite sure that there are many, many, many biologists studying bugs along the world so this was simply to give undue weight to a non notable study. If current research is going to be talked about lests find a secondary, high-quality source that talks about how the study of bugs is interesting for the world.
I have eliminated the New York section per excessive American bias (only city that is talked about). At most it should be summarized and integrated into the US paragraph. Since it did not have any citations I leave it here for future integration.
New York City has experienced increased cases of bedbug infestations since the early 2000s, with some reported[citation needed] in hotels, schools, and hospitals. In 2004, New York City had 377 bedbug violations[citation needed]. However, in the five-month span from July to November 2005, 449 violations were reported in the city, an increase in infestations over a short period of time[citation needed]. Some domestic cases have escalated to extreme levels, causing residents to label the infestations "house herpes"[citation needed]. Exterminators and entomologists[who?] blame the infestations on the fact that so many international travelers visit New York City each day.
Regarding "Current Research", I agree with the basic point: too much weight on work at only three labs, not enough for a wide-angle view. However, coming up with good citations and usable images takes work -- maybe it's best if we preserve these here on the talk page, with summaries, for use in other sections or in a revived Current Research?
... Researchers suspect that resistant populations of bedbugs have slowly been propagating in poultry facilities, and have made their way back to human hosts via the poultry workers.[1][original research?][dead link][2]
(WP:NOR violation?) ... bedbugs could potentially provide crucial evidence linking the suspect to the crime scene. Researchers are able to identify what hosts are being fed upon, and are taking further steps to be able to identify the individual by genotyping, and to predict the duration from the time of feeding to recovery of viable DNA.[3][4]
^Szalanski, Allen L., James W. Austin, Jackie A. McKern, C. Dayton Steelman, and Roger E. Gold. 2008.Mitochondrial and Ribosomal Internal Transcribed Spacer 1 Diversity of Cimex lectularius (Hemiptera: Cimicidae). Journal of Medical Entomology 45(2): 229–236link
^Szalanski, Allen L., James W. Austin, Jackie A. McKern, C. Dayton Steelman, Dini M. Miller, and Roger E. Gold. 2007 Isolation and Characterization of Human DNA from Bed Bugs, Cimex lectularius L., (Hemiptera: Cimicidae) Blood Meals. Journal of Agric. Urban Entomology 23(3): 189–194link
^Szalanski, A.L, J.W. Austin, J.A. McKern, T. McCoy, C.D. Steelman, and D.M. Miller. 2006. Time course analysis of bed bug, "Cimex lectularius" L., (Hemiptera: Cimicidae) blood meals using PCR. Journal of Agricultural and Urban Entomology 23: 237-241
Potential forensic uses is admittedly a marginal topic. However, the recent resurgence will be a notable topic, for some time to come :-( I think it's worth holding onto references to what researchers are recently saying about that. Yakushima (talk)
This section appears to be a huge temptation to newbies to violate WP:NOTHOW. There is already a ton of how-to information available on the Web; if anything, this article links to too much of it, rather than not enough. Yakushima (talk) 14:52, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
I've added a Howto tag, even though I've deleted almost all WP:NOTHOW violations.
Ok, I understand the rationale for deleting it, since it was poorly written per WP policy. However, there's a difference between a howto and a survey of commonly employed treatments. That information does seem to be lacking in the article. Look at Cockroach#Role_as_pests as an example... it lists all of the typical treatments by name. 137.254.4.8 (talk) 04:32, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Actually, that cockroach abatement section seems a little out of control to me. Some of it could go under biology, some of it under history, etc. Yakushima (talk) 15:21, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
We need to have this section added back and done properly. Need is similar to "Diagnosis and Treatment" section for diseases or medical problems. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.228.195.86 (talk) 13:14, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Treatments for diseases and medical problems are usually applied by professionals. The former Control and Elimination section here had become a free-for-all of advice and techniques from amateurs, with very little substantiation in professional practice. The references and external links have plenty of information (from professionals) about bedbug abatement. If someone wants to write a Wikibook about how to do this stuff on your own, nobody's stopping them. Yakushima (talk) 15:21, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Really? By that logic, one could argue that the taxonomy doesn't belong. It's "usually applied by professionals"; it's easily found on the web in other references; and if someone wants to write a Wikibook about it, no one's stopping them. Obviously ridiculous. I agree completely with 98.228.195.86. No one is debating that the section as previously written was somewhat inappropriate. But it is certainly appropriate to briefly discuss what professional exterminators would typically use for eradication. That was the main reason I came to read this article in the first place. A few sentences with citations would go a long way. If someone wants to take a crack at doing this in a manner consistent with WP:NOTHOW, I think it would improve the article. 137.254.4.9 (talk) 03:09, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
"Invitation to edit" trial
It has been proposed at Wikipedia talk:Invitation to edit that, because of the relatively high number of IP editors attracted to Bedbug, it form part of a one month trial of a strategy aimed at improving the quality of new editors' contributions to health-related articles. It would involve placing this:
You can edit this page. Click here to find out how.
at the top of the article, linking to this mini-tutorial about MEDRS sourcing, citing and content, as well as basic procedures, and links to help pages. Your comments regarding the strategy are invited at the project talk page, and comments here, regarding the appropriateness of trialling it on this article, would be appreciated. Anthony (talk) 12:03, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
The list of articles for the trial is being reconsidered, in light of feedback from editors, and should be ready in a day or two. If you have any thoughts about the Invitation to edit proposal, they would be very welcome at the project talk page. Anthony (talk) 14:45, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
What if one brought in the lawn mower and had it run until it ran out of gas, leaving the building for several hours, and then opened all doors and windows for a few more hours?
70.54.181.70 (talk) 20:15, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
I understand some exterminators have taken to heating up houses to +50°C (122°F). What forms are they taking?
Will this increase sales of less than 12 gauge, heat resistant extension cords; close circuit cameras, cables, and monitors; thermometers; and space heaters?
Company or person gets 20 of them, attaches 10 to outlets, the other ends going outdoors; such in turn are attached to cords going indoors, each attached to a space heater. Turning all on, pulling cords apart if the temperature of one space gets too high. Have such run for about 8 hours, using less than $40 worth of electricity.70.54.181.70 (talk) 20:15, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
Any baking services for clothes, rugs, carpets, and furniture?
What if one released 50 spiders per room? Say wolf spiders (or some other roving spiders? What if one left once house open—doors and windows—for a week?70.54.181.70 (talk) 20:15, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
Are some races more resistant to bedbugs than others?
How well do, say, blacks compare, to say, redheads? Is the current paranoia about bedbugs as much as white conceit as would be, say, paranoia about skin cancer due to sun exposure? In all the articles, commentaries, and reports of the bedbug “invasion,” “epidemic,” and “pandemic,” have any of them made by black reporters, columnists, and commentators? If so, are their reports more sane and proportionate?70.54.181.70 (talk) 20:15, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
photophobia
What if light levels in one’s bedroom was always bright? What if one slept under, say, 4-40 watt fluorescent tubes from less than 1.5 meters (while wearing eye covers)?70.54.181.70 (talk) 20:15, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
How are goths, albinos, and other human photophoebes coping?
If bedbugs are like “house herpes” are there any confidential agencies, like dating clubs, were people can make connections to others who have also have bedbugs, and are thus not afraid to visit each others’ homes and apartments to watch TV together, have dinner parties, slumber parties, bring stuff over, give away clothes—all the things they used to do before the paranoia?70.54.181.70 (talk) 20:15, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
Where DDT or similarly banned insecticides are still used
I understand that in some parts of Africa, the malaria is so bad, that DDT is allowed for household uses (as opposed to farming). What are the bedbug (and other insect) reports there?70.54.181.70 (talk) 20:15, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
Can one get discounts if one goes to bedbug infested hotels, motels, and apartments?
Why don’t female bedbugs have genitalia, if presumable male bedbugs do? Is the article implying that male bedbug genitalia can piece a small insect’s exoskeleton?70.54.181.70 (talk) 20:15, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
Much there is I can stand. Most things not easy to suffer
I bear with quiet resolve, just as a God commands it.
Only a few things I find as repugnant as snakes and poison.
These four: tobacco smoke, bedbugs and garlic and Christ.
Epigram 60.
The X-Files
Lenny: Good night, sleep tight, don't let the bedbugs bite. No, no, that's... that's not what I meant... I... I didn't mean to imply that we had bedbugs... I... I meant to say don't let... don't let the...
Mulder: The 'Fiji Mermaids' bite?
Lenny: Yes, that's right... The 'Fiji Mermaids'...
Russian proverbs
Мал клоп, да воню́ч.
Transliteration: Mal klop, da vonyuch.
Translation: Bedbug [might be] small, but [definitely is] stinky.
Moral: Even if that guy looks innocent/vulnerable, you better don't fool around with him, as you likely won't enjoy the outcome.
205.189.194.208 (talk) 18:30, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
Liquid carbon dioxide released from a pressurized container into the atmosphere could freeze insects and their eggs on contact, which may kill them. An enterprise in Secaucus, New Jersey, claims success in killing bedbugs.
Stern Environmental Group, LLC. "NYC bed bug exterminator". Advertisement. Retrieved 6 Sep 2010. We now are providing bed bug extermination with the new treatment from Europe called Cryonite®.
CTS Technologies. "Cryonite®". Advertisement. Retrieved 6 Sep 2010. The initial idea for this unique method of pest control - elemination of insects and their eggs through freezing instead of poison - was concieved by Per-Åke Hallberg, M.Sc, and biologist Bertil Eliasson, B.Sc, in 1996. Cryonite® is covered by extensive patent protection and the company owns all the intellectual property related to the technology.
--
Yep,, supported only by ads with typos, but wadda expect of Swedes and Jerseys? Still, the only reason I wound up on the bedbug article was because BBC broadcast about them swarming NYC, and a guy freezing them out with CO2, who has more business than he can handle but can't find anyone with smarts enough to handle the equipment who'll work for what he's willing to pay, so I tried to go ogle up what's so hard about it and how does it differ from putting out a fire. Goggling further, I found a bedbug sufferers' blog with a discussion archived for anyone who wants to see it: freeze them dead.
It might be the pure CO2 doing it. I caught a few bedbugs and put them in my freezer (in a baggie) and they were dead in 20 minutes. I also put them in a baggie and sealed it. Several days later, they were still alive, though there still might have been O2 left.70.54.181.70 (talk) 19:21, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
There's good evidence that a high concentration of CO2 can be lethal to bedbugs. However, sealing them in a baggie isn't a good way to demonstrate this. When they are not activated by a need to feed and some stimulus suggesting a host nearby, they go into a kind of "powerdown standby" metabolic mode, and won't use much oxygen -- and therefore they won't exhale very much CO2. Yakushima (talk) 09:34, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Reorganizing content
I would like to propose we reorganize the content per WP:MEDMOS. Our readers are more interested in the health implications than they are regarding the biology of this creature. Thus I would like to move much of this content to Bedbug bite leaving the information on biology here. A topic which is similarly laid out is Hepatitis B and Hepatitis B virus.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:46, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
A generally good idea, though I think some of these moves have been too sweeping (and left me initially confused, since they didn't follow the WP:COPYWITHIN guideline.) New readers of this article might not notice the pointer to bedbug bite. Even if they do, they might understandably consider bedbug to be strangely lacking on some topics -- and might start supplying material that used to be covered in bedbug, and which is now covered in bedbug bite even though it's kind of a stretch to consider some of that information on-topic for cimicosis. Yakushima (talk) 06:38, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Yes I guess we could duplicate the section on epidemiology and history if that is what you mean. Give me a few more days to rewrite and expand those with better references. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:12, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
Bedbug hysteria?
I was just reading this article in the New York Times. This is about the 3rd time I have randomly seen something in the news about bed bug complaints skyrocketing. Since the NYT article is more of a human interest story about a conference, I thought I'd turn to Wikipedia for more information about the hysteria or epidemic or whatever it is.
Are you saying we should have a section on the alleged hysteria? Or, on the resurgence? (Two very different things.) Assuming it's the latter, I agree. We do mention that there's been a resurgence since 1995, but I suspect that, in the last year or two, the number has skyrocketed. I'll look around for some numbers to back that up, though...JoelWhy (talk) 23:53, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
Possibly either or both! I'm not sure, because the media hasn't been helpful to me in learning whether there is a resurgence or just a media hype. :-) My point was just, this is the sort of thing that I think and hope Wikipedia will do well - when the public hears some hyped up story in the media and wants background on what is going on, it's nice when we are there with the dry facts. As nothing more than an interested reader and fan of Wikipedia, I look forward to seeing what you find. :-) --Jimbo Wales (talk) 13:31, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
I think the article already substantiates (though not as clearly as it might) that there has been a resurgence. To some extent, admittedly, there's now a feedback loop: press coverage of resurgence generates more attention to infestations or symptoms not hitherto recognized as such, and this could lead to an artificially rapid rise in reports, eventually overshooting to the point of hype. (My own opinion is not objective, because I co-manage a hotel, one that's had infestations only in the last year. But I'd say the whole thing probably exceeded the "hype" threshold this summer.)
In the talk page for begbug bites, I've proposed a separate article called something like "Global bedbug resurgence starting in the late 20th century" -- an admittedly ungainly title for what is otherwise definitely a notable phenomenon, albeit one with some decidedly fanciful/urban-legend elements. Reports of the real phenomenon being overstated would definitely be on-topic for an article like that. I'm leery, however, of including that kind of thing in any great detail in bedbug -- I mean, once you're talking about whether you have reliable sources for verifying that there are unreliable sources, couldn't it all get kind of endless? Editing bedbug already feels enough like that as it is .... Yakushima (talk) 11:12, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
I regret that my current schedule permits little more than making a modest contribution to the Wikidragons as Endangered Species Fund. Thank you! Yakushima (talk) 10:29, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
Diatomaceous Earth
We've indicated that Diatomaceous Earth is effective as a form of treatment. I'm wondering if we should also add that it can be dangerous if inhaled. I realize this isn't supposed to be a "how to" article, but I fear people will see this and begin spreading DE around the house thinking it's a quick fix. Thoughts?JoelWhy (talk) 19:18, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
I was a little unhappy to see mention of DE return, especially in such brief form, though I decided to leave it for now. Your concerns go back to some of the original rationale for WP:HOWTO. Wikilinking diatomaceous earth helps a little, I guess, because that article has a section on safety considerations. Pest control professionals seem ambivalent about the stuff, saying it can work but also that you've really got to follow directions -- which undoubtedly include safety-related directions. I had a friend bring me some DE to Japan (where I can't find it sold), and I was horrified to see that the jar looked like some cottage industry production, with no health warnings on the label at all. (I can't even be very sure I got real DE.) Perhaps some mention of use by professionals and some citation from some reputable journal would be in order here. Yakushima (talk) 11:26, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Here's info from Penn State University's College of Agricultural Sciences:
Inorganic materials such as silica gel, boric acid, and diatomaceous earth will provide long-term control, provided they are used in an environment with low humidity. These inorganic materials have very low repellency, a long residual life, and can provide good control if thoroughly applied to cracks and crevices. However, they are typically white in color and may leave the surface of items with an undesirable film unless they are carefully applied.[1]
Hi, I changed the text from 'attack' to 'feeding' as from the insect's perspective that is all they are doing, part of their life-cycle. 'Attack' is an anthropocentric perspective, not an ecological one; if any editor can think of a better word than 'feeding' or 'attack', please change the text! Ta, Mondegreen de plume (talk) 13:56, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
There's another option. If you think lots of people who come here are actually looking for an article about the infestation, insert a hatnote linking to bedbug infestation.Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:45, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
I think this article should stay where it is, with the title it now has, per WhatAmIDoing. But, I would support a hatnote directing people to bedbug infestation, plus I would also support a redirect from "bedbugs" (with an "s" at the end) to "bedbug infestation". If people type the "s" at the end, it suggests they're more interested in infestation than if they omit the "s".Anythingyouwant (talk) 20:45, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Since the only species fully adapted to humans hence living is beds is Cimex lectularius I think the name "BedBug" referring only to him and not the entire family. 192.115.235.2 (talk) 09:31, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
There are two species Cimex lectularius (the common bedbug) and Cimex hemipterus the frequently bit humans. This article is about all bedbugs. The infestation article is about the interaction of bedbugs and humans. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:22, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
Bed bug or Bedbug?
It's spelled both ways in this article--we should pick one and stick with it. According this entomology blog it should be "bed bug" but AP Style Guide says it should be "bedbug". (Yes, I know, blogs are not reliable sources and I'm not proposing that we cite this blog in the article.) A pubmed.org search finds slightly more articles when searching on "bed bug" than "bedbug", however searching using the plurals yields the opposite result. My vote would be "bed bug" based on the entomological tradition described in the blog linked above. YilloslimeTC18:16, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
Yea, that's fine. Dictionary has it spelled both ways, so we should indicate that either spelling is correct. Beyond that, we should just have it spelled consistently throughout the article.JoelWhy (talk) 19:02, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
Secondary sources opine that it should be bed bug. For example, Walter Ebeling in Urban Entomology says, 'The dictionary is not always a reliable authority on common names of insects. One finds such words as "bedbug," "housefly," and "honeybee." These should be written as 2 words — "bed bug," "house fly," and "honey bee."' Therefore a reliable source is saying that other sources are unreliable. Per WP:Identifying reliable sources, there is ample reason to be confident that bed bug is correct. Abductive (reasoning)00:22, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
Behavior and Physical Recognition
Someone who knows should elaborate on the manner in which bedbugs leave their pheromone "food trails" during nocturnal explorations. Do they dart about, as ants do? Do they proceed in straight lines to a detected food source? When disturbed, do they scurry for cover? While they cluster in colonies, are there designated drones who explore outside the nesting area? Also, some recognition signals for the "musty" smell of bed bug scat and the shape of molt would be useful. Nice photograph of a molted nymph, by the way...hope I never see one. As the season is nearly upon us again, and in many parts of the country already is, we should be proactively watchful for the little bloodsuckers and be able to distinguish them from other, related, species. Keep those dimensions and good photos coming. Genehisthome (talk) 04:53, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
Hi everyone. I'd like to establish consensus for automatic archiving of this talk page by Miszabot (see details). This talk page has grown huge, and I don't think we have a human willing to archive it regularly (any volunteers?). I propose the following parametres:
I am reviewing the archives and reviving threads that are still relevant to this article becoming an A class. If I can figure out how to manage the Talk page / archive I will do it, but I am not quite there yet. Stephen Charles Thompson (talk) 21:25, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
I disagree. The most common names and alternates are usually found at the beginning of the summary. These are valid and needed for help with word searches. There is a wider list of colloquial names at the end of the summary. Stephen Charles Thompson (talk) 21:12, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
"Bed bug" is problematic because it is a common name and not species specific. I've been doing a lot of research on the name. I'll try to add a citiation regarding names specifically. Stephen Charles Thompson (talk) 21:30, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
We should have the common name "bed bug" and the scientific name in the lead. Different spellings and most of the slang should be moved to lower in the article IMO.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:04, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
I don't agree with the comment about blogs not being reliable sources. Some blogs host comments by known professionals in the area who are authorities and those comments are very valuable.
a fixation on peer reviewed publications is nonsensical as there are many reliable sources and some of these are blogs. Anecdotal information is also useful if it describes specific situations that are certainly possible even if not in a peer reviewed publication.
HYou don't have to be NY Times or JAMA to know what you are talking about. Sometimes these "reliable sources" can be downright ignorant if they have not checked the facts.
~~ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.206.33.120 (talk) 01:02, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
WP:SPS says, "Self-published material may be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications." This seems to perfectly fit the case of a published entomologist posting on a blog, provided that the person's identity is clearly established. --Dan Wylie-Sears 2 (talk) 04:40, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
I am unsure what citation this dispute references. It seems clear that published authorities may be cited, even in blog format. If the deleted citation can be found, let's restore it. Let's also agree to not delete citations hastily. We can use Talk to discuss it. Stephen Charles Thompson (talk) 21:11, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
photos have been added with comparison to human hair and screw head, but are not great examples. I also felt the need for a clear whole-body shot with a well-known comparison item. Request is substantiated. Stephen Charles Thompson (talk) 20:27, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
The statement at the beginning of the article "that prefer to feed on human blood" contradicts later statement "Most species feed on humans only when other prey are unavailable". These cannot both be true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.244.170.114 (talk) 00:25, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
reviews since I last looked. A couple are free and I should have access to the others.
Free Criado, PR (2011 Jan-Feb). "Bedbugs (Cimicidae infestation): the worldwide renaissance of an old partner of human kind". The Brazilian journal of infectious diseases : an official publication of the Brazilian Society of Infectious Diseases. 15 (1): 74–80. PMID21412594. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
Haisley-Royster, C (2011 Apr). "Cutaneous infestations and infections". Adolescent medicine: state of the art reviews. 22 (1): 129–45, ix. PMID21815448. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
Hurst, S (2011 Mar-Apr). "Bedbugs: not back by popular demand". Dimensions of critical care nursing : DCCN. 30 (2): 94–6. PMID21307684. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
Free Delaunay, P (2011 Jan 15). "Bedbugs and infectious diseases". Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America. 52 (2): 200–10. PMID21288844. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
I have done my own experiments and found a way to kill bed bugs cheap and fast. (solutions brand fabric refresher original cent odor eliminator.....generic for febreese..... will kill them on contact) and prevent them from coming back if you use it every day for at least 3 weeks. hope this helps you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.128.150.77 (talk) 15:18, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
While the thought that an odor control product sounds intriguing, the claim is pure original research. Something utterly forbidden here. If you can find a peer reviewed study that shows that the hydrocarbon trap molecules in that commercial product can control bedbugs, feel free to add it to the article, with proper citations from respected sources.Wzrd1 (talk) 04:14, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
Expansion on dehydration
To make the section about dehydration more readable. I suggest adding takes 16 days at 0 humidity and no blood access to kill female adults. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SaberW (talk • contribs) 18:22, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
This may be interesting for laboratory researchers, but of little practical value to readers of Wikipedia. The conditions you describe can't be achieved in a working residential setting. Even in the Sonoran Desert of Arizona, the relative humidity doesn't fall to zero, let alone for 16 days straight. — QuicksilverT@13:51, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
Dehydration is well outside of the capability of the average Wikipedia user. There is mention in the article of diatomaceous earth, which is used in many pest control arenas because of it causing desiccation of the insect by damaging the protecting coating on their bodies and causing dehydration in a normal environment. That said, for bedbugs, it's close to OR to make that claim (no documented studies I'm aware of to support it) and outside of the scope of the article. Indeed, it's a complex matter in variable homes that is best left to pest control professionals.Wzrd1 (talk) 04:17, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
The Recurgence of the Bedbug in the Western World
Less powerful insecticides? An increase of travelers bringing them back to country of origin?
In the past 30 years immigration has reversed from 70% British/European, 30% developing countries to the opposite. Travelers? Bullshit. A convenient word for immigrants. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.235.150.226 (talk) 11:39, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
"Psychological effects"
The term "psychological effects" of bed-bug infection is mentioned multiple times, but never explained. Can someone be more specific? 70.24.109.179 (talk) 03:12, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
Sleep interrupted by itching, general sleep interruption, mysterious rash with itching, unknown cause of the itching rash all can cause psychological effects. Sleep interruption alone can cause significant effects.Wzrd1 (talk) 04:05, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
Why was the paragraph on B. bassiana removed? It seems relevant and well sourced. There are plenty of secondary sources if that's a concern. Kendall-K1 (talk) 02:38, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Does WP:MEDRS apply here? I do think the fungus merits a mention. Given the preliminary nature of the research I put in a single sentence with disclaimer and left out the photo. Kendall-K1 (talk) 13:15, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
I am just requesting that you use a review article from the last few years. If there are not any than the notability is suspect. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 02:02, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
Wait, I am confused: the article had a citation to a professional peer-reviewed journal indicating the surprising effectiveness of B. bassiana in controlling a bed bug population, and the paragraph was removed because the research was... preliminary? Isn't all research "preliminary" in that it is intended to discover something not currently known? Was the methodology of the research poor? Was it original research? Did it not suggest am important link between bed bugs and B. bassiana? If it met all of those requirements, then I do not understand what the reason was behind its removal. A reference to research in a peer reviewed academic journal should never be removed for only being "preliminary." A finding is a finding. Or did I miss the point? KDS444 (talk) 11:15, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Also, Doc James, you stated that "the notability is suspect." The notability of the research? This article is about bedbugs, not about the research on B. bassiana, so notability is not at issue. All that is at issue is whether or not that research is relevant. Which it is. Notable, certainly not. Relevant, undeniably.KDS444 (talk) 11:22, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
What you used was Barbarin, AM (2012 Sep 15). "A preliminary evaluation of the potential of Beauveria bassiana for bed bug control". Journal of invertebrate pathology. 111 (1): 82–5. PMID22555012. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help), [4] Neither one of these is a proper secondary source. Please read WP:MEDRS. The study in question even states it is preliminary. I have provided a review above and one below. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 11:24, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Regardless of whether WP:MEDRS specifically applies here, a reliable - meaning scientific - secondary source is needed here. Can you identify a review article or meta-analysis published in a reputable peer-reviewed journal that covers this? If not, it is correct to leave it out of the article. Popular press is notoriously unreliable when it comes to handling scientific information, especially for coverage of recently-released study data. Zad6814:19, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
A reliable source is what is required. As mentioned, popular press is notoriously unreliable for reporting on scientific study results. Do you have a reliable secondary source in mind? Zad6820:31, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
