Talk:Giardia duodenalis

message: The original version of this article was taken from the public domain source at http://www.nigms.nih.gov/news/releases/giardia.html -- site is a U.S. Federal government site, and the author has a U.S. Federal Government E-mail address and is listed on the staff directory. The Anome 22:02 Apr 16, 2003 (UTC)
There is also another image uploaded at :image:giardia.jpg, but it's not as good-looking, but I thought I'd mention it here less it become an orphan.
:I've remobed the classification given on this page, because it was entirely inaccurate.  Diplomonads, of which Giardia is the best known, are completely unrelated to ciliates and have always been considered as such.  Unfortunately I can't replace it with anything else, since the classification of flagellates is still in flux.  I am researching the current thought on the excavates, and hopefully will be able to put something here soon. Josh
::hmm... I put that taxobox in.  I can't recall where I got the classification from, but it certainly doesn't stand up to investigation.  I'm no microbiologist and I suspect I picked it up from another Wikipedia page and missed some crucial discontinuity.  What do you think of the ITIS version:
  Kingdom Animalia  -- Animal, animals, animaux   
     Phylum Sarcomastigophora     
        Subphylum Mastigophora  -- flagellated protozoans   
           Class Zoomastigophora     
              Order Diplomonadida     
                 Family Hexamitidae     and they are always running in your body!
                    Genus Giardia Kunstler, 1882    
                       Species Giardia lamblia Kofoid and Christiansen, 1915 
:we presumably wouldn't want to place them in Animalia, but there doesn't seem much disagreement about it at least up to Zoomastigophora.  I would feel happier giving some kind of taxobox, even if we express doubts about it in the text, than leaving the uninstructed reader with no idea about what kind of creature this might be at all.  seglea 09:35, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion 

message: You must excuse the incompleteness of this post, ie no other references, but my own research, with a Dr. Lower has confirmed that 'testing' for giardia is not 100% accruate.
That is the test for giardia must be repeated 4 to 5 times, that is 4 - 5 times before you can rule out the possibility of Giardia.
So the problem is that people suffering from 'the symptoms' get tested once, and if the test is negative, falsely believe that they do not have giardia.
Now the problem is compounded because chronic intestinal problems can lead to a variety of symptoms that we label as 'diseases'.
I will be following up by doing research on the City of  Walkerton, referred to as the Walkerton Tragedy whereby animal waste entered the water supply, and going by visual reports on TV, some of the individuals developed MS type symptoms; so the potential of neurological symptoms is very likely.  
Question is why is this not being researched and exposed ?
There must be a wealth of knowledge to be gained by this unfortunate experience.
--Son of Maryann Rosso and Arthur Natale Squitti 16:17, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Walkerton outbreak was of E. coli, not Giardia. Maxpower212 (talk) 23:53, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem with testing for Giardia. 

message: There seems to be some inconsistency in the explanaitons of how to kill this nice little creatures. Some says boiling the water kills it, other adds "if you boil the water for three minutes". Anyone here who knows how hard-killed they are? It sounds surprising they should not die in boiling water before three minutes has passed? This article now states just "boiling". I'm really getting curios here... is this wrong, or is the article right as it is?  Greswik 18:58, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The minimum recommended boiling time is 1 minute at full rolling boil, or 3 minutes if you are more than 2,000 meters above sea level.  I believe this is from the CDC, but I am a Giardia and Crypto researcher. Maxpower212 (talk) 23:55, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding boiling of water 

message: A distance scale is needed on the micrograph.  Xxanthippe (talk) 04:50, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Size

message: This succession of words in the article that is close to being a critical recommendation has no verb and is therefore not a sentence and is also not a comprehensible sentence fragment:
Treatment of drinking water for Giardiais not ordinarily indicated in wilderness regions, including much of the Sierra Nevada and other similar locations in North America.
132.239.181.21 (talk) 21:11, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Something missing in critical recommendation 

message: Just wondering if this page and the one on Giardiasis should be merged or if this one should be just about the critter itself while the giardiasis page is reserved for the infection and all the stuff about prevention, diagnosis, and treatment.--209.7.195.158 (talk) 21:36, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: In reality those two pages are a mishmash of both subjects (the organism vs the infection it causes). They need to be separated more clearly. I'll do it. - Draeco (talk) 18:29, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge? 

message: There is a contradiction in the article concerning the presence/absence of mitochondria in Giardia between the Intracellular Metabolism para and the prior para: 
Distinguishing features of the trophozoites are large karyosomes and lack of peripheral chromatin, giving the two nuclei a halo appearance. Cysts are distinguished by a retracted cytoplasm. This protozoan lacks mitochondria, although the discovery of the presence of mitochodrial remnants organelles in one recent study "indicate that Giardia is not primitively amitochondrial and that it has retained a functional organelle derived from the original mitochondrial endosymbiont"[4]
Intracellular Metabolism and biochemistry
Giardia relies on glucose as its major energy source and breaks glucose down into ethanol, acetate and carbon dioxide.[5] However, it can also use arginine as an energy source.[6] The mitochondria of Giardia possess unique biochemical pathways that suggest that it diverged from other eukaryotes at an early stage in evolution.[6]
.......
I am not expert in this, so I'd better not say which I think is right, but the contradictory text should either be tightened up or enlarged/clarified, possibly with an additional section.
Punctum (talk) 15:42, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not an expert either, but I've probed the literature a bit.  Giardia seems consistently said not to have mitochondra.  Further, the abstract of the Brown, Upcroft et al. reference used on the second excerpt above does not say it has them, and in fact gives evidence it says supports the lack of mitochondra. Therefore I have removed the mitochondria mention from the pathways statement.  Good catch on your part, Punctum.  -R. S. Shaw (talk) 21:58, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mitochondria presence/absence contradiction in article 

message: the word "giardia" appears far more frequently on the web than does "beaver fever", and a lot of the beaver fevers are about sports teams and sex. And I would add, "giardiasis" is also a more commonly occuring word than beaver fever, and I never hear anybody say it, people say "he got giardia". The article should say that the common name is giardia. Also mentioning "beaver fever" maybe?... I'm not convinced. 68.174.97.122 (talk) 21:16, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beaver Fever? I doubt it 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Giardia lamblia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20000915204130/http://link.springer-ny.com:80/link/service/journals/00239/bibs/48n6p779.html to http://link.springer-ny.com/link/service/journals/00239/bibs/48n6p779.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091211132532/http://www.aftenposten.no:80/english/local/article2052645.ece to http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article2052645.ece
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:31, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow users, I would like to potentially replace the current species name of lamblia with intestinalis as this does appear to be the new common name for the protozoan. Any thoughts?
https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/176718-overview
Lharris15328 (talk) 22:22, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Google Scholar estimates 23.8K results for intestinalis and 65.8K results for lamblia; restricting to results of 2008 and later, it gives 15.5K and 22.5K, respectively. Overall, that shows lamblia predominating. --R. S. Shaw (talk) 02:25, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name change to ''Giardia intestinalis'' 

message: — Assignment last updated by Erinhansonuwec (talk) 21:21, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Epidemiology ENPH 450