Talk:Oxytocin

message: Like for Testosterone, I think the role as a hormone should be explained before explaining the use as a medication. The RedBurn (ϕ) 13:18, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It is both a hormone and a medication. It is on the World Health Organizations list of essential medicine in fact. Both aspects are important. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:14, 30 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sure they're both important, but it really feels jarring to get into medical details like administration protocols and side effects before any discussion of the chemical's role in neurobiology and social neurobiology—the topic of many, many books'  worth of research     . If anyone has plans to improve and reorganize this article, I think this aspect is WP:DUE a much larger emphasis. FourViolas (talk) 00:35, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a discussion to split the article which would solve your concern. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 00:44, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Split done. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:59, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: FWIW I wouldn't have split this article but whatever. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:18, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oxytocin is a hormone 

message: "Oxytocin is normally produced by the paraventricular nucleus of the hypothalamus and released by the posterior pituitary.[5]"
"Produced" and "released" mean about the same thing. It seems more likely that it's produced and released by the pituitary, and some other chemical or signal from the hypothalamus triggers release or production.108.211.84.128 (talk) 18:21, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  This looks like an error 

message: "There’s a chemical that can subtly shift your childhood memories of your own mother. In some people, it paints mum in a more saintly light, making them remember her as closer and more caring. In others, the chemical has a darker influence, casting mum as a less caring and more distant parent..." - http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notrocketscience/2010/11/29/the-dark-side-of-oxytocin-much-more-than-just-a-love-hormone/
For the study, see http://www.pnas.org/content/107/50/21371  Gstree (talk --Gstree (talk) 02:49, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: media hype over a primary source.  wikipedia shrugs.  we wait for reviews, per WP:MEDRS Jytdog (talk) 02:50, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  The dark side of oxytocin, much more than just a “love hormone” 

message: "Plays a role" versus "affects"...
IMO "plays a role" is better as this is a natural substance which is involved in these processes. Not seeing how changing this to "affects" is an improvement. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:13, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: f 14.141.137.246 (talk) 09:07, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wording

message: - Propose to update "Biological function" to include "feeding, https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2019.00297" HeadDr (talk) 00:04, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Two issues. One is that the source is primary. Second is that Frontiers is not a very good source (are concerns it is predatory). Better to find a better source. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 11:56, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update oxytocins role in feeding 

message: After reading this article I noticed that some of the sections are too long and some others are missing some information. The biochemistry section talks about the effects Oxytocin has on females. However, it leaves out information about how oxytocin relates to lactation and milk production in women. The next section that concerned me was the biological function section. The social subsection it contains is too long for the information it contains. Lastly, there is a history section at the end that contains no helpful information that should be deleted. (Mgironta (talk) 04:58, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Length of the Sections 

message: says: "When there is a reason to be distrustful, such as experiencing betrayal, differing reactions are associated with oxytocin receptor gene (OXTR) differences. Those with the CT haplotype experience a stronger reaction, in the form of anger, to betrayal."
this is unintelligible for the layperson because the expression "ct haplotype" is used only once in the whole article without ever telling what its difference from other types. also theres no mention (and therefore no clue to the meaning of) "ct haplotype" in the "oxytocin receptor" article.
therefore it seems to be unnecessarily technical to start talking about a certain haplotype )without ever telling what are the other haplotypes and what their functional difference is) and obscure (because the lack of context). 
instead please change the article to something like "people/or rats or whatever subjects are used in the experiment related to this/  with the oxytocin receptor type that differs from the receptors of others in .../clarify in what the ct haplotype is different/ react with more anger to betrayal in the experimental situation".
89.134.199.32 (talk) 19:56, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  subsection 2.2.6. Social 

message: The redirect TI-001 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Mdewman6 (talk) 21:16, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:TI-001]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: I just removed a short paragraph (on 2024-02-22) that seems to be based entirely on a 1993 PhD thesis, which is cited. The paragraph also cites a 1960 review article, but much of the sentence preceding that citation is from the 1993 PhD thesis and not from the 1960 review article. Some parts appear in both, but I think the whole paragraph is based on the 1993 thesis.
The thesis repeatedly refers to oxytocin as an "octapeptide", but also says it is composed of "nine amino acids". I think this is because they are counting peptide bonds, not amino acids, but I'm not sure. Multiple dictionaries define "octapeptide" as containing eight animo acids, and I didn't find any dictionaries with any other definition.
The 1993 PhD thesis doesn't even include any means of measuring the reduced (non-cyclic) form of oxytocin, which it calls "oxytoceine". It also doesn't mention oxytoceine very much. So the thesis never attempts to show that this reduced form is generated during the experiments.
The entire paragraph seems unworthy of Wikipedia, because the reduced (non-cyclic) form of oxytocin certainly exists, in theory and in a lab that wishes to synthesize it, but there is no evidence it exists in vivo. There is extremely little evidence that oxytocin functions as an antioxidant or free radical scavenger in living tissue. This latter question is not investigated in any of the experiments in the 1993 PhD thesis, although the hypothetical possibility is mentioned. 209.6.225.254 (talk) 13:10, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed a paragraph based on a 1993 PhD thesis