User talk:Mealsforhealth

Here's wishing you a welcome to Wikipedia, Mealsforhealth. Thank you for your contributions. Here are some useful links, which have information to help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Wikipedia:Questions, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! Jytdog (talk) 16:44, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Mealsforhealth. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the article Caldwell Esselstyn, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your circle, your organization, its competitors, projects or products;
instead propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. General Ization ^Talk 23:29, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How this place works

Hi mealsforhealth. Please do have a read of the links in the Welcome message I left at the top of this page.

Here, as well, is a brief(ish) overview, to help orient you. There are some non-intuitive things about editing here, that I can zip through ~pretty~ quickly....

The first thing, is that our mission is to produce articles that provide readers encyclopedia articles that summarize accepted knowledge, and to do that as a community that anyone can be a part of. That's the mission. As you can imagine, if this place had no norms, it would be a Mad Max kind of world interpersonally, and content would be a slag heap (the quality is really bad in parts, despite our best efforts). But over the past 15 years the community has developed a whole slew of norms, via loads of discussion. One of the first, is that we decide things by consensus. That decision itself, is recorded here: WP:CONSENSUS, which is one of our "policies". (There is a whole forest of things, in "Wikipedia space" - pages in Wikipedia that start with "Wikipedia:AAAA" or for short, "WP:AAAA". WP:CONSENSUS is different from Consensus. ) And when we decide things by consensus, that is not just local in space and time, but includes meta-discussions that have happened in the past. The results of those past meta-discussions are the norms that we follow now. We call them policies and guidelines - and these documents all reside in Wikipedia space. There are policies and guidelines that govern content, and separate ones that govern behavior. Here is very quick rundown:

Content policies and guidelines

WP:NOT (what WP is, and is not -- this is where you'll find the "accepted knowledge" thing)
WP:OR - no original research is allowed here, instead
WP:VERIFY - everything has to be cited to a reliable source (so everything in WP comes down to the sources you bring!)
WP:RS is the guideline defining what a "reliable source" is for general content and WP:MEDRS defines what reliable sourcing is for content about health (please make sure you understand MEDRES, for sources to support content about effects of a diet)
WP:NPOV and the content that gets written, needs to be "neutral" (as we define that here, which doesn't mean what most folks think -- it doesn't mean "fair and balanced" - it means that the language has to be neutral, and that topics in a given article are given appropriate "weight" (space and emphasis). An article about a drug that was 90% about side effects, would give what we call "undue weight" to the side effects. We determine weight by seeing what the reliable sources say - we follow them in this too. So again, you can see how everything comes down to references.
WP:BLP - this is a policy specifically about articles about living people. We are very careful about these articles (which means enforcing the policies and guidelines above rigorously), since issues of legal liability can arise for WP, and people have very strong feelings about other people, and about public descriptions of themselves.
WP:NOTABILITY - this is a policy that defines whether or not an article about X, should exist. What this comes down to is defined in WP:Golden rule - which is basically, are there enough independent sources about X, with which to build a decent article.

In terms of behavior, the key norms are:

WP:CONSENSUS - already discussed
WP:CIVIL - basically, be nice. This is not about being nicey nice, it is really about not being a jerk and having that get in the way of getting things done. We want to get things done here - get content written and maintained and not get hung up on interpersonal disputes. So just try to avoid doing things that create unproductive friction.
WP:AGF - assume good faith about other editors. Try to focus on content, not contributor. Don't personalize it when content disputes arise. (the anonymity here can breed all kinds of paranoia)
WP:HARASSMENT - really, don't be a jerk and follow people around, bothering them. And do not try to figure out who people are in the real world. Privacy is strictly protected by the WP:OUTING part of this policy.
WP:DR - if you get into an content dispute with someone, try to work it. If you cannot, then use one of the methods here to get wider input. There are many - it never has to come down to two people arguing. There are instructions here too, about what to do if someone is behaving badly, in your view. Try to keep content disputes separate from behavior disputes. Many of the big messes that happen in Wikipedia arise from these getting mixed up.
WP:TPG - this is about how to talk to other editors on Talk pages, like this one

If you can get all that (the content and behavior policies and guidelines) under your belt, you will become truly "clueful", as we say. If that is where you want to go, of course. I know that was a lot of information, but hopefully it is digestable enough. Jytdog (talk) 16:47, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, not sure if I'm even responding correctly to this message I received. Thank you for your response. I can't really figure out how to have a conversation with someone, so I'll try editing your comment.

Was there something wrong with the suggestions I made for Dr. Esselstyn's page? He is listed as living in a city he does not live in, for example. I stated which city he lives in and gave a reference to support that. But in response I got a long discussion and some hours of suggested reading on Wikipedia I'm supposed to do? I know I can't make any corrections myself because I am a friend of Dr. Esselstyn's, whose page this is about. It seems that I'm obviously going about it wrong which is why I don't get any response other than canned responses pointing out I should visit a bunch of links and read a bunch articles before trying to suggest input to correct some obvious errors. I'm not sure what "consensus" has to do with correcting what city Dr. Esselstyn lives in. There are multiple ways to confirm this information, as well as other facts that are easily shown to be wrong in the article. But I guess I am going about it wrong, I must first try to become a wizard of Wikipedia and learn a bunch of the ropes, which is why I can't get any discussion of the facts going at this point. Sigh. If there is another way Dr. Esselstyn can contact someone to request facts be corrected on his page, please let me know so I can pass that along to him. Thanks.

Mealsforhealth (talk) 20:33, 5 April 2016 (UTC)mealsforhealth[reply]

Hi Mealsforhealth. I've replied on the article talkpage. Much of what you suggested has merit, but we can't use it all, as I discussed there. You should know that although the page is about him, it is not "his page". Edits to wikipedia are the property of those who make them, freely licensed for use under the terms of the CC BY-SA 3.0 and GFDL licenses when they click "Save page". The resultant articles are the collective property of those editors who contributed, but still under the same licenses. Please do not be discouraged. We all know the barrier to entry is high enough to intimidate new editors, and will try to help. Fortunately, there is no deadline here.

I note that at Commons:File:Reversal_of_Coronary_Artery_Disease.jpg you claimed the image as your "own work", but it appears to be a variation on Figure 1 from doi:10.1111/j.1520-037X.2001.00538.x. Both Wikipedia and the Commons are very careful about copyright compliance. Please make sure that you can document that authorship claim, or amend it as need be. LeadSongDog come howl! 22:14, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mealsforhealth, as I wrote at the article Talk page, I provided you with the information above so that you would understand how Wikipedia works, what kind of content we include and what we don't do, and the basis for those decisions. If you don't care about any of that, that is fine, but don't argue with us or be upset when you don't get what you want. Jytdog (talk) 03:42, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again Wiki-Editors - hope you guys are all doing well! I consulted with Dr. Esselstyn, my friend, and related your previous comments and responses. He has offered the following for your consideration. I realize he is the subject and not the "owner" of the Wikipedia page that bears his name, but he also is uniquely positioned to be an expert on the subject, so I hope he will get a fair hearing here. And certainly anything he's saying that you feel is not adequately backed up, please let us know and he can provide whatever you may require in that regard, including directly to you, if you wish.

Responding to earlier points raised, and using the same numbering in your response:

1) I see that you removed the city of his residence, which is fine. Though he lives in Pepper Pike, he was fine with it reading "near Cleveland" if that were preferable.

3) Under the heading of "known for" in the box on the right side of the page, Dr. Esselstyn feels what he is known for is not an appearance in one of many documentaries he's been featured in, but he in fact is recognized as one of the pioneers in halting and reversing cardiovascular illness. This is why he has been featured in many films, TV documentaries, and articles in the international press. He began his research in reversing heart disease 31 years ago, in 1985, and began publishing his research and clinical strategies in 1991, 25 years ago. Since then he has regularly published in peer reviewed journals as recently as April, 2016. I am pasting a listing of some of Dr. Esselstyn's published research. He really feels his work, rather than an appearance in one film, is what he is known for. He is known for his work preventing and reversing heart disease.

To further back this up, Dr. Esselstyn’s research in heart disease was published first in 1995, 21 years ago in the "Journal of Family practice:” A Five Year Longitudinal Study of a single physician’ practice.( 14)

Prior to that in 1991 in Tucson, Arizona Dr. Esselstyn organized, directed and was the program chairman of the First National Conference on the Elimination of Coronary Artery Disease. (14)

In 1997 in Buena Vista, Florida he organized, directed and was the program chairman of the 2nd National Conference on Lipids in the Elimination and Prevention of Coronary Artery Disease.(14)

He was a guest editor and contributor in l998 to" The American Journal of Cardiology” based on the 2nd National Conference: A Symposium: Summit on Cholesterol and Coronary Disease.(14)

His presidential address as the president of the American Association of Endocrine Surgeons in 1991 was “Beyond Surgery.” (14) which discussed his early findings in reversing coronary heart disease.

His updated 12 year experience with arrest and reversal therapy for Coronary Artery Disease is respected as one of the longest longitudinal studies of its type in medical literature.

His publications in Cardiovascular Disease number 13 from 1995 - April 2016.

He has been invited internationally to share his research and clinical strategies in India, Singapore, New Zealand, Australia, Lithuania and Italy. His best selling book, Prevent and Reverse Heart Disease has been published in multiple foreign languages.

In 2015 Dr. Esselstyn was invited to join the nutrition committee of the American College of cardiology and to serve as a panelist at the April 2016 national convention in Chicago.

Not to belabor the point, but I hope you will agree that Dr. Esselstyn's work is what he is known for, not for being interviewed in a particular documentary.

5) You previously said, "[Dr. Esselstyn's] awards are mentioned on his self-published sources, do we have something reliable and independent that talks about them? Without that it is difficult to establish which ones are worthy of note."

Dr. Esselstyn asked what specifically you need to know about these awards. A newspaper article about the award? A copy of the award? A letter from CC?

6) Regarding this point #6, you wrote: "I think your revised wording incorporates some synthesisof sourced ideas, which we try to avoid here. The 2001 paper is freely available from the publisher at doi:10.1111/j.1520-037X.2001.00538.x and indexed at PMID 11832674. We don't need to, and shouldn't, use his website for this. WP does not treat sources that old as being current, though they sometimes are used when they hold historical value, as for milestone papers (Watson & Crick, e.g.). This one is usable for biographical purposes, but it does not meet WP:MEDRS, which is our guideline for selecting medical sources. Anything based on it would be put in Esselstyne's voice and past tense, so as to avoid misleading the reader into thinking the encyclopedia endorses it as current."

Would you like all Pub Med references for the studies themselves, if you are leery about cites on Dr. Esselstyn's website?

7) This concerns the "criticism" of Dr. Esselstyn's work mentioned in #7 and appearing the page about Dr. Esselstyn. While Dr. Esselstyn has been doing research in cardiovascular disease since 1984, the list below shows his publications on the subject since 1991 up to 2016. Please note these peer reviewed articles in relation to any reference to “sloppy research” and Harriet Hall.

I am not sure why Wikipedia would quote a retired Air Force flight surgeon, who states she delivered many babies as her professional occupation, and is now a hobbiest blogger in her spare time. I don't know why you would use her personal reflections to cast aspersions on Dr. Esselstyn's work. Can Dr. Hall cite the defects of the review process of The American Journal of Cardiology, for example, in evaluating Dr. Esselstyn's research, in order to support her allegations? I doubt it, since she has very thin credentials.

Why would Wikipedia have extremely high standards for Dr. Esselstyn to back up his work, and virtually no standards when it comes to posting insulting allegations from a rank amateur that his work is sloppy?

Why don't you instead quote a cardiologist to evaluate Dr. Esselstyn's work? In fact, I would suggest Wikipedia consult a cardiologist like Kim A. Williams, MD, president of the American College of Cardiology. If you do, you will see that he is a strong advocate of Dr. Esselstyn's work, e.g.

http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/08/06/advice-from-a-vegan-cardiologist/?_r=0

Here are Dr. Esselstyn's studies on his heart disease-reversal research:

Caldwell B. Esselstyn, Jr., MD

Publications in Heart Disease

1. Esselstyn CB Jr., Presidential Address – “Beyond Surgery” – Presented at the Twelfth Annual Meeting of The American Association of Endocrine Surgeons, San Jose, California, April 14-16, 1991. Surgery Dec. 1991: 110 (6): 923-27.

2. Esselstyn CB Jr., Ellis SG, Medendorp SV, Crowe TD. A strategy to arrest and reverse coronary artery

                 Disease – A 5-year Longitudinal study of a single physician’s practice.  The Journal of Family

                 Practice 1995 December; 41 (6): 560-568.

3. Esselstyn CB Jr., Foreword: Changing the treatment paradigm for coronary artery disease. The

                 American Journal of Cardiology 1998 November 26; 82 (10B):  1T-4T.

4. Esselstyn CB Jr., Introduction: More than coronary artery disease. The American Journal of

        Cardiology1998 November 26; 82 (10B):  5T-9T.

5. Esselstyn CB Jr., (Guest Editor). A Symposium: Summit on Cholesterol and Coronary Disease. 2nd

                 National Conference on Lipids in the Elimination and Prevention of Coronary Disease.

                 Supplement based on a symposium held on September 4-5, 1997 in Lake Buena Vista, Florida.

                 The American Journal of Cardiology 1998 November 26; 82 (1CB):  1T-94T.

6. Esselstyn CB Jr., Updating a 12-year experience with arrest and reversal therapy for coronary artery

                 disease.  The American Journal of Cardiology 1999 August 1; 84:  339-341.

7. Esselstyn CB Jr., In cholesterol lowering, moderation kills. Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine 2000

                 August; 67 (8):  560-564,

8. Esselstyn CB Jr., Resolving the Coronary Artery Disease Epidemic Through Plant-Based Nutrition;

                 Preventive Cardiology; Fall 2001; 171-177.

9. Esselstyn CB Jr., Prevent and Reverse Heart Disease; Penguin Publishing – 2007.

10. Esselstyn CB Jr., Is the Present Therapy for Coronary Artery Disease the Radical Mastectomy of The

                 Twenty-First Century?:   Manuscript received April 5, 2010, revised manuscript received and

                 Accepted May 3, 2010.

11. Esselstyn CB Jr., A way to Reverse CAD?: The Journal of Family Practice; July 2014; Vol. 63, No. 7;

356-364b.

12. Esselstyn CB Jr., The Nutritional Reversal of Cardiovascular Disease – Fact or Fiction? Three Case

                 Reports.  Experimental and Clinical Cardiology; Volume 20 Issue 7; 2014 – 1902-1908.

13. Esselstyn CB Jr., Defining an Overdue Requiem for Palliative Cardiovascular Medicine,

                 Ajl Sage Pub.com – April 2016.

Mealsforhealth (talk) 02:40, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]