Talk:Visceral leishmaniasis

message: It may be of interest to Wikipedians that the journal Nature (20 April 2005) published an editorial on the (widely ignored) importance of articles on this (type of) topic:
:The all-embracing open-source encyclopedia Wikipedia doesn’t have a dedicated page on kala-azar, or visceral leishmaniasis. But who cares? After all, the disease only transforms vast numbers of people in developing countries into walking skeletons [...].  [...] it often goes untreated, causing some 200,000 deaths each year. In the research and development (R&D) chains that lead to drugs, more attention is devoted to silicone breast implants and pills for erectile dysfunction than to the roughly 8,000 orphan diseases. [...]
:[....]
:A round table on neglected diseases [...] in Lyon, France, last week, left a depressing sense of how far we have all got to go [...].
:[....]
— Reference:  "Wanted: social entrepreneurs";  Nature;  434 (7036) : pp.941–941
Note to all bush lawyers:  it is generally acceptable use to copy (verbatim) extracts from (copyrighted) publications, hence the ellipsis above.
See also Wikipedia:Avoid_self-references
— DIV (128.250.204.118 07:50, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: In 2005 Wikipedia had been in existence for—what—four years? Rome wasn't built in a day, nor is Wikipedia a complete model of human knowledge in, well, ever. This is rather like mocking the editors of the Oxford English Dictionary for not having any entries past C after four years. Nor did the situation last: Looking at the article history, Visceral leishmaniasis was created about six months after the editorial in question - by an anonymous editor no less. (See also: Eventualism). -- MarcoTolo 02:23, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Can't help but notice that the sandfly vector is "3-6 micrometers long by 1.5-3 micrometers in diameter" yet the infectious protozoan is "only three to seven micrometers in diameter".  How can this be?  The protozoan is larger than the sandfly.  Should the sandfly be in millimeters?  If I knew, I would edit this, but I have no expertise on this - I only read this article because B. Gates was talking about this disease today.
How can the mortality be virtually 100% deadly, yet only 32% require treatment? Is it 1. "non-progressive", i.e like some with HIV, or 2. The test itself is highly sensitive but not specific (high false positive), or what?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.174.174.88 (talk) 04:34, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Nature

message: Come on, folks! Help to become this article better. Add some figure, specially in life-cycle. Retornaire (talk) 10:20, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  More pictures 

message: The statement that kala-azar is Sanskrit term is supported by a reference to a reliable source on the WHO website. Merely changing it to Assamese, Hindi or any other language contradicts the cited reference, so is unacceptable. Because the used reference is considered reliable, I also don't think deleting it is justified.
If you wish to state that kala-azar means "black fever" not only in Sanskrit but also in other languages, please add your statements after the cited reference, and document them with relevant references. Please note that I do believe what you say is correct. My objection is that it is not properly referenced.  --Abanima (talk) 16:16, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kala-azar 

message: I have quoted two references as suggested, viz. Collins English Dictionary and the Medical Dictionary. These, I strongly believe, should clear any doubts whatsoever that you may have been harboring about the origin of the word "azar". "Azar" as a word has no connections with the Sanskrit language. If at all, for references sake, it does show its inclination towards Persian apart from Assamese(check references).
I have provided the justification behind the corrections I have made and I trust they will not be undone again.
Hope that suffices. Killerdove 11:57, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kala-azar: Corrections 

message: I would like to se (for all dseases) information of which hosts that are necessary for survival of the disease. If only humans and human controlled animals are necessary, then it is in theory possible to eradicate that disease, but if it can survive outside that it is difficult or impossible to eradicate that disease. Cholera is one example, it survives outside humans in tropical waters and are thus next to impossible toeradicate now In Haiti.
Seniorsag (talk) 13:39, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Necessary hosts? 

message: *Kala azar in India
I made a version of the disease as it exists in India. I would appreciate comments either here or on that article's talk page. It seems to be the case this disease can come from different parasites through different species of fly. Because of this variation, the disease can spread in different ways and have different treatment in different places. I would appreciate anyone's thoughts on managing articles for regional variation
I found this to be a challenging topic to enter.  Blue Rasberry (talk) 01:55, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  New article - Kala azar in India