Talk:Demodex

message: Some recent observations: demodex have and annus where you would expect one.  One specimen had coloratiion of the digestive tract by some unknown substance, and the mouth and annus were clearly visible.  The next day I observed a specimen creating a globular amber colored excretia out of it anus.  These observations are with a 10X magnification glass. It is apparent that the literature about this organism needs to be corrected, as it asserts that this arthropod has very efficient digestion and needs no annus.  Peoples' sensitivity to this topic is understandable, but I do not believe these misconceptions need to be repeated in Wikipedia.
Theravadaz (talk) 09:28, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Demedex 

message: We need some pictures of these mites living in humans.  Since they are so small a good picture would probably consist of an overpopulated eyelash resulting in some inflamation  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.193.163.207 (talk) 09:17, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Pictures of human infestation??

message: Do males and females typically look alike and have the same lifestyle? How does the male fertilize the female? Where are the eggs stored? How long does it take until they hatch, and then how long does it take until you get adult mites? AxelBoldt 03:39, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Most of it answered now in the article, from the cited Dermatologica article. AxelBoldt 17:15, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Life cycle questions needing to be answered

message: How can a person tell whether they are hosting D. folliculorum, D. brevis, or both? -GTBacchus(talk) 00:23, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The article says you can see them under a microscope on your eyelashes. AxelBoldt 06:37, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Detection 

message: I question whether this matter is of low importance.  I myself have an long time infestation by the organisms which has severely hampered me is some activities.
On another "importance" level, the organisms I harbor, no longer conform to the description given. They live on the scrotum.  The eyes are sometimes open.  I observed one walking quickly--not slowly. I suspect the proboscis mouth part is often inserted directly in a small blood vessel because profuse bleeding when the organism is removed by force.  This bleeding suggests an anticoagulant such as used by mosquitos. This suggests a possiblity of communication of common parasites between blood and insect host.
My observations have been with a 10X dual lens magnification glass.  I have observed perfectly identical "fibers" transfixing some organisms on the same oblique angle. To assert that the population on my body was highly polymorphic, would be a rather unbased relative assertion except that I treated myself with a drug active against invertabrates.  When the infestation returned, the organisms under visualization were remarkably uniform and conservative, resembling the classic Demidex type--and without fibers. 
My point is that there are phenomena here which indicate changes from the descriptions in recent literature that suggest possible transgenic augmentation of selective and adaptive processes.  At the very least the literature should be brought up to date or corrected if originally flawed or incomplete.
Theravadaz (talk) 13:24, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Observations

message: The saga of personal affliction ends on a cheerful note.  Instead of being diagnosed with a psychosis as some might suggest, I have made interesting observations about the arthropods that were previously infesting my skin.
I had at least 4 distinct populations: The regular one; the small ones that cruise the skin at night (brevis); a scrotal variety with special cappilary feeding tube and fast legs; and a large variety, sometimes more than one mm in length that inhabits my nasal passages.
The first population to go was the scrotal infestation.  A local preparation of camphor was sufficient.  The nasal population I am resigned too.  I may try frequent camphor inhalations.
The general under the skin  varieties that produce scabes with insect casts by some hyperplastic process, have been controled by Benzyl Benzoate.  I am taking a conservative approach and using it one time in a light general application and will continue to use it locally to suppress outbreaks.  I can not believe that open ulcers are characteristic of a normal flora (in this case fauna) and intend to suppress the population down to what could reasonably be called a normal flora.
It seems like we are dealing with an insect that has the capacity to establish a differentiated community (possibly differentiated reproductively as well), and this might involve additional life stages that are unknown, or, it may be a case of sympatric, allopatric or kariotypical speciation, or a combination of these.  When I last looked at the subject, the etiology of normal flora was "an unknown".  Perhaps the Greeks were right, infestation was a punishment by Zeus for the gift of fire to man by Promethious.
Theravadaz (talk) 08:50, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Some final observations: Demodocosis 

message: At least half a year has elapsed from my elimination of my demodex infestation.  I would like to credit a previous wikipedia article which I can not find.  When I went looking for it I found instead an article describing a psychosis where people imagine these insects.  The original article must have been written by an errant dermatologist, as he had it right: these populations crash below a certain level.  I imagine whoever pulled this article has a professional interest in preventing people learning about this issue.
In summary, I applied Benzyl Benzoate to my entire body one time.  After that I had to use topical Chloramphenicol to control infection at the previous sites of anthropod infestation.
My subjective appraisal is very strong: this infestation was debilitating and probably has an enormous impact on public health. This is a matter of great importance.
Theravadaz (talk) 08:56, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Executive Summary", Demodex Infestation Control 

message: If it's a parasite, it can't be commensal. The article calls it both... Alphachimera (talk) 16:37, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Seemingly, so do the sources. It appears a matter of controversy.OakRunner (talk) 02:16, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

text: Upon further consideration, it should be noted that this is an entire genus, and that individual species are going to differ. D. gatoi for instance is primarily pathogenic, while most are commensal, and some are debatable.OakRunner (talk) 20:15, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parasitic or Commensal? 

message: I see only one source in the section "Demodex on humans" when it clearly needs a lot more. There's already one [citation needed], there should be more.
Darvince (talk) 18:07, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, there is some plagiarism of advertising claims going on here, so I will rewrite the whole section to something more approaching  medically reliable source guidelines. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 16:55, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Entire section without sources? 

message: Apparently there have been recent findings concerning a possible link between Rosacea and the bacteria in Demodex feces (released at the mite's death). I am a layman and unqualified to really investigate whether this should be updated in the relevant articles here. If this is purely speculative, perhaps it should still be mentioned as such?Ernest C. Ruger (talk) 03:56, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible Rosacea link 

message: I checked the source for this explanation of the name's origin, and that site also says the prefix demo means fat, but that doesn't sound right at all. Demos means people, as in democracy. The Greek word for fat should be lipo, shouldn't it?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.113.192.12 (talk) 01:35, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Demos means fat??? 

message: Seriously? 118.211.33.4 (talk) 12:29, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  3⁄256–1⁄64 in