Jump to content

Talk:Lorenzo's oil

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

Early discussion

[edit]

The ALD pages now states that the substance does show significant benefit. The page needs to be updated. I may do it later. JFW | T@lk 18:46, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I am not qualified to update the page to come into line with current research but I'd help verify any citations. I also feel that some brief summary of the genesis of the oil is needed on this page. I know the link to the arctile on the movie covers this but it needs to be here in brief. Lisapollison 16:35, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I subtracted "short chain" from the description because neither oleic (18) or erucic (22) can be considered "short". Short chain seems to be shorter than 10. Oleic is considered long, I thought.Bipedia 03:32, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hugo Wolfgang Moser died January 20 2007 http://www.guardian.co.uk/obituaries/story/0,,2017725,00.html. --Aspro 23:04, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not updated often. Yeah I don't know much about the subject but in the article it says "Most recently, Aubourg has reported success with transplant of the ALD gene, using HIV virus as the vector." From my viewpoint it seems the person now has ALD and HIV. I must be reading it wrong but if anyone sees this will they please explain?Spinningfox (talk) 18:46, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It says most insurance companies won't pay for Lorenzo's oil. Which ones will? That's what I'd like to know. There ought to be some kind of a fund set up so that poor families can get this stuff free or cheap. --Bluejay Young (talk) 02:19, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article mentions the competitive inhibition of fatty acid elongation by Lorenzo's Oil, but fails to mention the source. Well, This may just be the citation[1] the article needs, but I have no access to it, short of paying US$ 20. 23:56, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Clarification Needed in Article--Who Received Honorary Doctorate?

[edit]

This article implies that the late Lorenzo Odone received the honorary doctorate from Univ. of Stirling--but the article on Augusto Odone (the father) says that he did in recognition of the research that allowed his son to survive for so much longer. The latter seems more plausible but which assrertiion is correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.174.246.169 (talk) 18:11, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Patent

[edit]

Here are links to the patent for the substance of "Lorenzo's Oil" ('Patent# 5,331,009)

Pharmaceutical compositions for treating adrenoleukodystrophy Google Patents

Pharmaceutical compositions for treating adrenoleukodystrophy USPTO (Note: These links usually expire after a certain time period) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.67.115.63 (talk) 18:42, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Lorenzo's oil. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:48, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lorenzo's oil. 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) 23:55, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Shouldn't "Effectiveness" be ordered chronologically, not positive findings awkwardly sorted (hidden) in the middle and negative on the bottom?

[edit]

This subtopic just doesn't seem to display information in an unbiased way as the 'benefits' are sort of hidden in the second and third paragraph, and the final paragraph that's referencing a staunchly negative test just so happens to be the oldest (I mean 1994, come on. Studies have developed so much since then even if completely disregarding the indescribable advances of genetics and knowledge on the brain...), yet is listed at the bottom, where most eyes will scan to and possibly skip the recent studies (which are over a decade newer in some cases). This seems inconsistent with Wikipedia when it comes to scientific publications on the merit of medical treatments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.250.59.59 (talk) 07:00, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mechanism?

[edit]

It's been many years since I saw the movie, but I thought it explained the theory or mechanism of how the oil works ... would be interesting to see that hereFeldercarb (talk) 01:53, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lorenzo%27s_oil&oldid=1200919925"