Jump to content

Talk:Colostomy/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Removed

Removed a large portion of recently added "how to" care for ostomies, etc. This material had no ref, and was largely based on image and perception. This type of information while potentially useful for someone with an ostomy does not have relevance to this article, this type of info is readily available from the links/reference section of the article.

I believe that the link to MeetAnOstoMate.com should be re-inserted. This is a website for ostomates from around the world. It is intended to help ostomates find friends and/or start relationships. I think the link would be an appropriate addition to the topic of this article and useful for the readers.

I understand the desire to offer a resource helpful to people with ostomies, but Wikipedia's guildlines don't allow such entries. Here are four Wikipedia unexceptable external link guidlines that might apply:

  • Links mainly intended to promote a website.
  • Links to sites that primarily exist to sell products or services. For example, instead of linking to a commercial bookstore site, use the "ISBN" linking format, giving readers an opportunity to search a wide variety of free and non-free book sources.
  • Links to sites that require payment or registration to view the relevant content.
  • Links to social networking sites (such as MySpace), discussion forums or USENET.

DCwom 14:08, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I think support groups are completely appropriate for an encyclopedia article. The article should contain information about dealing with colostomies. I agree it should not use language targetted at those with colostomies (e.g. "to change your colostomy bag") but this information is pertinent for people looking up this page on the internet who either have one, or want to know what it's like. Tristanb 11:25, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
I think that this particular social networking site is a poor choice for this article. I'd probably support a link to a major charity that happens to have a chat board, but MeetAnOstoMate.com is basically a dating service for colostomy patients. (Did you actually go to the website and click the Advanced Search option? How many bona fide patient support groups let you search for people based on their sexual orientation, marital status, age, eye color, and body type?). I realize that Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia, but imagine your reaction if you found a link to that website in Encyclopedia Brittanica. I bet you'd be thinking that it was a joke perpetrated by the printers instead of a normal, reasonable part of an encyclopedia article. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:42, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree with removal of specifics that are not complete and correct.

I am a long-time WP editor with an ileostomy. I am in favor of removing all specific information about pouches, barriers, and other ostomy devices, stoma care, etc. The problem is that specific ostomy care is highly individual, with many options available. Each patient needs to explore and experiment in ways too complex to describe in a limited resource like WP. Similarly, resources such as online support discussions and chat rooms (which are generally not dating clubs) should be mentioned, but specifics depend on individual patient situation; they also change dramatically over time.

WP is essentially a compendium of information gathered from third parties (reliable sources). These sources are not sufficient to provide adequate medical advice, especially for situations with many alternatives, like ostomies. Already some of the advice in this article is incorrect, misleading, or specific to some individuals, but it does at least give a little flavor of what is actually involved in ostomies. David Spector (talk) 01:35, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Closure of colostomy with re-anastomoses

A helpful addition could be that some colostomies are temporary (such as mentioned in the text) and require certain criteria before reanastomoses can be considered (example: the colour of the feaces, ect.). If someone can add these criteria in a well structured manner, it would be very helpful. 198.54.202.250 21:30, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Merge with ileostomy

How about mergin this article, ileostomy and cecostomy into intestinal stoma. Much of the information overlaps both articles. I can start it, but wanted to know what others thought first. Tristanb 01:12, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

No merge - Colostomies, and ileostomies share some common characteristics, but I'd rather see the two articals diverge with each becoming more descriptive than they are now. As for "intestinal stoma" I can guess the meaning, but is it a real medical description? DCwom 12:35, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

No merge - My opinion would be that there should be one parent article ("Ostomy"), with subsidiary articles for specifics on urostomy, ileostomy, colostomy, etc. There also need to be many advisories that WP articles should not be relied on for medical advice. Ostomates have to learn much more material than could reliably be included in WP articles, written by nonspecialists and following the limiting WP policies. David Spector (talk) 01:44, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Colostomy - My Journey - External Link

Please be so kind as to add my website as a Link on the Colostomy Page. Many Thanks indeed.

www.colostomy-myjourney.blogspot.com

Sincere apologies for any confusion caused by my duplicating this message in any way. I am a bit of a tecnophobe so learning 'on the job'.

Kind Regards

Rachel Bruce

rachelebruce@btopenworld.com or chris_short1@hotmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beanie Bruce (talk • contribs) 16:02, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Rachel, While we respect your individual story, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and as such is not the right place for your link. David Spector (talk) 01:49, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Colostomy - My Journey - External Link

I also wish to apologise for not signing.

Beanie Bruce (talk) 16:06, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Irrigation

I undid an addition to the irrigation section because it had a broken reference and it seems to be a very detailed description of the irrigation procedure. If you look at the article as a whole irrigation seems to be a major part of colostomies (about 1/2 the article) while there is only a small percentage of individuals who actually irrigate. I propose that the irrigation sections be combined into a single smallier section describing irrigation in a true encyclopedia format, i.e short and to the point. DCwom (talk) 12:48, 4 October 2011 (UTC) Comment of DCwom:- So nice of you to undo this, may I ask what your own training is in this world of ostomies? Are you an ostomate?

The reason I added the longer explanation to irrigation that was already there is that it did not give the right explanation for and how to irrigate. Many ostomates take it into their heads that once having heard about irrigation, it is a simple procedure, which it is absolutely not. Advice should be taken from medical professionals before beginning down this pathway and people do not do this. One ostomate says to another "I irrigate, it's much esier than wearing a bag" ostomate two blindly orders the equimenr without any contact to the stomal nurse or consultant assigned to their care and then the trouble begins. These thing should be explained properly. What broken reference were you referring to? I gave the full reference. For your detailed information. I am an ostomate of many years standing, members of all 3 Uk ostomy Associations, write the Crohn's and Colitis Newsletter for Wales and was commissioned to write a book in 2007 as a resource for ostomates. It is now listed as 45th out of the top 100 health resource books in the UK and has been glowingly reviewed independently by the UOAA (United Ostomy Association of America)'s journal The Phoenix, September edition by a journalist that is sydicated to the NY, LA and Chicago Times on Health matters. He also happens to be an ostomate. Are YOU? Pur website is a non profit information portal (also in the process of being revamped into a wordpress platform to extend the information we can provide from medical sources and professional contributors only).

As an international journalists of 35 years accredditation, we wrote a book which is now listed as 45th out of Amazon's UK health reference books - Unwanted Baggage. (1st edition Published in Feb. 2011); 2nd edition is being published in December 2011 with a print run of 10,000 initially. This was compiled after 5 years of intensive reseach talking to medical professionals worldwide in 7 languages (which we speak fluently), and reading countless research papers from universities' medical research departments, talking to their authors and reviewing conclusions. This work has been recognised by the United Ostomy Association of the America's Journal "The Phoenix" which gave it enormous acclaim over two pages - the Phoenix reaches 1.2 million ostomates, medical libraries, stomal and colorectal nurses and gastroenterologists in 80 countries. The updating website http://www.thebowelmovement.info/ is an information portal only. No registration is requied. No membership is required, Nothing is asked in return. It contains relevant updated information on every aspect of ostomy life including the latest prescription ostomy products (not at the request of any manufacturer) and ostomy reviews of these products and breaking medical news (we are members of the BMJ journlists contingent and as such receive embargoed ground breaking medical news which we pass on to members. We have no forum or chat rooms, we take no advertising and are a strictly non profit company.

We do collect donations when possible but these are passed directly to the three main ostomy associations in the UK. but provide links to the 80 International Ostomy Associations some of which are government mandated and provide more specific in-country information. We also provide an educational service by producing ostomy videos for children to show they can live a normal life with and despite and ostomy. These videos are now is use with the Australian Stomal Nurses Association, The UOAA Nurses association and on the Norwegian Ostomy Association Website (sponsored by the Norwegian government).

The information we provide has been vetted by many of the professional bodies and associations worldwide. You seem to discount Associations as social organisatiions. This is not true of the official associations in the UK - i.e. The Colostomy Association, IA Support and The Urostomy Association of the UK, all of whom work with professional medical staff. In Australia, the Ostomy associations are government funded to distribute ostomy supplies to all ostomates who receive government funding. There are many chat rooms and forums which take advertising and exist as profit maming concerns. we do not fall into this category, with even the profits (royalties) from the book being donated to the UK's ostomy charities. These are strictly audited by an indpendent accountantcy firm. Someone seems to delight in removing any reference to us or our content from the wikipedia without any justification or knowledge of our activities. We have not been notified of these removals and had to find out ourselves. Elizabeth & Philip Prosser 14:48 October 4th 2011.""""

While I had nothing to do with the removal of any material, I do support such removal. Wikipedia is a encyclopedia and is not sufficient to provide medical advice. Irrigation, Jpouches, support groups, and the treatment of peristomal irritations are examples of subjects way too detailed and individual for inclusion. Please read my comments above about removing such material from WP. General and very short mentions of such topics are acceptable, when accompanied by an advisory stating that WP should not be relied on for patient medical information. David Spector (talk) 01:58, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Colostomy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:14, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Undid cancer text in the introduction by RLEstl2017

There are many reasons for a colostomy as described in the indications section, this text was added to the intro, also the text should have a reference to support its claim about reducing the percentage of colostomies for cancer patients. This additional information and a reference would be an appropriate addition to the indication section.

Historical Development

Seems there should be a "history of procedure" section, the developers of the procedure & its first use outlined to give it an historical context. Rtelkin (talk) 19:42, 7 September 2020 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Colostomy/Archive_1&oldid=1110884685"