Talk:Reproductive toxicity

Chemistry Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemistry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of chemistry 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.ChemistryWikipedia:WikiProject ChemistryTemplate:WikiProject ChemistryChemistry articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Occupational Safety and Health High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occupational Safety and Health, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to occupational safety and health 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.Occupational Safety and HealthWikipedia:WikiProject Occupational Safety and HealthTemplate:WikiProject Occupational Safety and HealthOccupational Safety and Health articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Environment Mid‑importance

	Environment portal This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 13 January 2022 and 14 April 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Akrainev (article contribs).

Radio frequency electromagnetic fields

I think is content is not necessarily relevant. Considering the lack of evidence of reproductive toxicity, its inclusion may be confusing for readers or potentially controversial. There are other examples that may be more necessary to include.

Mcwillaa (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 20:22, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

The content so far is relevant to the topic; however, this is only one aspect of reproductive toxicity. The article only talked about some substances that cause reproductive toxicity. Since the topic is something related to the reproductive system, I strongly believe that we can add two large section for men and women. I believe it is important for us to tackle the sexes differently because they have different reproductive organs. The article also did not discuss anything regarding the cure and treatments that are currently in practice, if there are. Since this is related to human health, it is good to put what research has found out about this now. Aside from cures, the symptoms and effects of reproductive toxicity to humans is also something that can be added. GladL (talk) 22:55, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Look up definition of reproductive toxicity

"Reproductive toxicity is a hazard associated with some chemical substances,". No, this is wrong. Unfortunately, government sources are beginning to refer to Wikipedia or include it among other sources. This is ominous. Someone is going to get hurt. Reproductive toxicity may be caused not only by chemical substances, which definition is unacceptably narrow. It may also be caused by biological agents, or some types of radiation. Warnings for a casual reader should be attached to substandard articles. If this one has a warning is not visible enough! Cheers! 71.221.167.209 (talk) 04:03, 2 June 2020 (UTC) I do agree as well that the definition of "reproductive toxicity" needs further refinement-it needs to include radiologic and biologic hazards. I will re-edit it and try to cite multiple sources. Akrainev (talk) 15:50, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Citations needed

from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mcwillaa/Evaluate_an_Article#Feedback_from_instructors

Some of the sources are recent while many are over a decade old and may need updating. Additionally, there is overreliance on a handful of scientific articles in some sections. There should be multiple references in those instances. As a result, there is also a lack of diversity in the authors cited. There are also example sections that are supported using animal studies, which while useful, might benefit from additional human study references. TMorata (talk) 18:47, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Epidemiology of Occupations

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 11 January 2024 and 18 April 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mcwillaa (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Hart2me.

— Assignment last updated by Hart2me (talk) 17:34, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]