Talk:Morgellons/Archive 1

message: RE: The marketting theory, there are the following pieces of evidence:
- The fact that nobody has heard of this before.
- Sites that allude to a mysterious press release or conference that will occur *after* the release of 'a scanner darkly'
- The extreme close up nature of all photographs showing the mysterious 'fibers'.  There is no photography that at *all* shows the fibers 'growing from the skin'.
- It describes perfectly the 'coke bugs' feeling that figures prominently in the 'a scanner darkly' novel.
- None of the 'official' Morgellons websites have had their DNS entries for very long, they have all been registered relatively recently.
- Where is the CDC statemeny?  Bird Flue anyone? --—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.142.188.166 (talk • contribs) 
::For what it's worth, the archive seems to show that  was up and running as early as July 2002, so if it's a viral marketing ploy, it's been planned well in advance.. --Aim Here 15:08, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, the morgellons wiki page has been up since feb 2005.
+++I have to agree. This sounds more like something for an In Search of.. episode than something for Wikipedia to document.04:07, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I call BS 

message: This material from the article cannot be included without sources. Charles Matthews 09:51, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Unsourced

message: Should this entity be capitalized?  I'd probably favor the lower case version, since this isn't the name of a person or place.  Andrew73 18:52, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it should be capitalized, since all press and internet usage so far, including the AP and the London Times, has capitalized it, so that's the common usage. Herd of Swine 22:42, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Morgellons or morgellons 

message: Haven't the "white crystalline granules" generally been thought to be salt, from evaporated sweat and tears? MickWest 05:35, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  white crystalline granules 

message: Referring to springtails (collembolans) as "insect-like hexapods" is weird, since springtails are insects, and "hexapods" is a synonym for "insects".  It's like saying that deer are "mammal-like mammalians".
And the "disease" is pretty clearly imaginary, too. 
CarlFink 18:25, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The current thinking actually places the Collembola inside a grouping called Hexapoda but separate from the Insecta because of their differences with the rest of the insects. See our Collembola article and this news story. DopefishJustin 04:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, when I was an undergraduate ... okay, maybe I'm becoming an old fogey. CarlFink 21:43, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Taxonomy 

message: There is a bacteria that could produce exactly the symptoms described. Acetobacter Xylinum eats glucose (among other things) and excretes strands of cellulose. http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/73/12/4565
The Morgellon's site said the strands they examined were cellulose. http://www.morgellons.org/symptoms.html
Antibiotics have been used successfully by some for symptomatic treatment. http://nurse-practitioners.advanceweb.com/common/EditorialSearch/AViewer.aspx?AN=NP_05may1_npp16.html&AD=05-01-2005 Maybe some of these people have undiagnosed diabetes. High blood sugar would feed the bacteria and damage peripheral circulation, making healing more difficult.
Ulcers were thought to be 'stress' until the true bacterial cause was found. I don't think it's fair to label Morgellons sufferers as delusional   209.214.19.143 01:57, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: According to ABC, Billy Koch no longer claims to have ever had Morgellons, it was his wife, making it up.  While the above discussion is fascinating, it's still OR, and the article needs to have cited sources. Herd of Swine 15:18, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Possible Cause 

message: What's with the "Leitão"? Why not "Leitao"?  She does not use the accent on her own web site , so what's it doing here? Herd of Swine 16:19, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leitão vs. Leitao 

message: There is at least one listing on PubMed  that describes Morgellons (or should it be morgellons) disease.  Granted, whether or not it is a psychiatric illness (e.g. like delusions of parasitosis) is a different issue.  Andrew73 22:00, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Anyone who thinks it's a hoax, please read the references first.  People really believe it's a real disease, and it's been around for ages.  Herd of Swine 23:31, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well http://www.sploid.com/news/2006/05/horror_illness.php thinks it could be a hoax. And did you look at the references for real? One was in popular mechanics (not really a medical science magazine, or really scientific for that fact). The 1690 article was about hairs after death, according to the footnote of the link. (As far as I could tell sir thomas was real). The annals of medical history paper is wierd, I can't find it in that book. As a matter of fact, I couldn't find that book at all in our library (the university of nijmegen). The rest of the references are mostly to newssites or morgellons sites. And reference number nine adds very little to the validity of the article actually. It only tells us that the MUPS patients / doctor relation suffers if the MUPS patient isn't getting the anwser he wanted. So, I don't think the references are that compelling. Does anyone with a more medical eye to the case have the time and will to read them all? I will consider this a hoax from now on. --Soyweiser 09:12, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed hoax tag 

message: Is someone going to rewrite this incorporating the CDC's recent statement regarding morgellons, and the taskforce they are forming to investigate it? Or are you just going to argue on the internet? --- 216.255.15.9 18:17, 27 May 2006 (Unsigned comment)
:I can't find any reputable source for any CDC statement on Morgellons.  There's nothing on their web site.  Some sites mention a "task force", but they don't give a source, or a full quote, or any real details. Anyone got a good link? Herd of Swine 18:36, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "our call"?  Who are you 216.255.15.9 ? You should sign in, and sign your comments please. Herd of Swine 06:39, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  CDC Position 

message: **NOTE: Morgellons Disease is not a real syndrome but an internet hoax.**
This started as an internet hoax and has exploded in the past few years because Senator Feinstein fell for it and wrote a letter to the CDC asking for an investigation.
Morgellons Disease is the fruit of conspiracy theory websites that usually branch off into this is some sort of reptile alien trying to take over the world.  Don't fall for this hoax.
:I disagree.  I have seen several news reports with multiple different people including doctors talking about it.  --mboverload@ 09:59, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course it's real, which is why no credible group of physicians believes you or anyone else with this "disorder". Did you read the part where it said that the spike in reports started only when the website was made?67.187.112.115 21:58, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I mean, fibers erupting from under peoples skin, how could it be any less real?--203.59.166.123 22:41, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Internet hoax

message: I removed:
:* Demodicosis - Infection by the spider mite Demodex foliculorum or Demodex brevi.  Some accounts suggest the mites must themselves be infected with Ringworm fungus to produce disease symptoms in man.
:* Pinworms - A nematode Oxyuris vermicularis (formerly Enterobius vermicularis) commonly diagnosed in toddlers, but, oddly, never in adults.  In 1910, a study at a Boston hospital concluded that 10% of all removed appendices contained live pinworms that appeared to have caused the appendicitis.  There is no reason to suppose it is any less prevalent today.  Modern epidemiological studies suggest most humans harbor this nematode.  Its microfilarial larvae are said to become airborne as domestic house dust. (I lost my references, I hope someone else can attribute, clarify or correct these claims).
:* Sparganosis Infection by the tissue-migrating cestode Spirometra proliferatum.
:* [[[Dirofilariasis]]] Infection by the dog heartworm Dirofilaria (latin for "evil thread").  Why did they give it that name?  The name alone suggests its discoverer thought its importance transcended the canine realm.
From the "Diagnosis" section, as they seem more like speculative causes, rather than diagnoses that fit the symptoms. They are not generally found in adult humans. Demodicosis and Dirofilariasis are dog specific diseases, Pinworm and Sparganosis (tapeworms) do not account for the symptoms, and Pinworms is generally a pediatric condition whereas Morgellons is generally reported in adults.  The section is not on potential causes, but rather what a doctor may diagnose, based on the reported symptoms. Herd of Swine 02:56, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If there's literature, then feel free to cite and add this information to the appropiate articles. You might want to read Help:Contents/Policies and guidelines first. --Herd of Swine 07:03, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Odd Diagnoses

message: Can someone who is not necessarily convinced that this a real, albeit misdiagnosed disease take a look at cleaning up the article?  The introduction does a half-decent job of weaseling out of obvious bias, but the rest of the article treats it as an established fact, though one not accepted by the scientific community.  I'll take a crack at it if no one involved with creating the current version wants to.
:Just to be clear, a diagnosis of Morgellons as a disease is not (currently) accepted in the scientific/medical community.  This is due to the current lack of understanding of the condition (delusional? true parasitic? are the fibers biologicial in origin, or environmental synthetics? etc).  The current and ongoing research itself such (Oklahoma State University, others) is accepted (as long as those studies are scientific in method, of course).  That is, at this point the scientific community can't definitively say "Morgellons is/isn't (blank)"; however, they can say "we are conducting research to understand the cause of the symptoms, the origin and composition of these fibers, etc".  As researchers continue to gather information, they can begin to include or rule out the many possible explainations for this phenomenon.  Morgellons is not an established disease, nor is it simply a hoax.  The controversy exists in whether this is an emerging unknown disease or delusional parasitosis, not in the endeavor to scientifically determine its cause--and therefore a possible treatment.  This, IMO, is what the article should reflect.  Peace.  --buck 17:21, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Tone 

message: I saw that they've done some preliminary work in investigating fibers from one "patient" and discovered that the fibers collected do not have a match under the FBI fibers database, the database that is supposed to contain info on all the natural/manmade fibers in the world in order to help the FBI narrow investigations. The fibers also seem to glow under UV light. Does anybody have a link to a good source on this?--65.16.61.35 20:48, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please provide us with any documentation you can find. So far nearly all (if not all) objects provided for examination have been identified as known fibers, specks, dandruff, skin, etc.. Until identified we can just call them UMP. -- Fyslee 20:59, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Some more info on the lab results  here and on the glowing fibers here Herd of Swine 02:14, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Unidentified Morgellons Phenomena (UMP)

message: The section on George Schwartz  seems out of place.  The guy is obviously a quack, trying to push some $125 self published book .   Should the section just be removed, or re-writted to mention the variety of quacks associated with "Morgellons"?  Herd of Swine 01:16, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  George Schwartz  

message: I believe that this article is very biased towards stating that this is a psychological disorder.  In order for the article to be balanced, it needs to say that it has not yet been determined conclusively whether or not it is physical or psychological and that the CDC is investigating.
October 18, 2006
- New Lab Findings Point To Silicone/Silica and High Density 
Polyethlyene Fibers Causing Morgellons Disease.
http://www.dldewey.com/morgel.htm'''
:Very interesting.  Any ideas about what to do with this?  I'm bringining it down to the bottom of the page for discussion. --Dematt 14:10, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The article is very biased 

message: Pez1103, please stop immediately. This is not your article. You are exercising bad faith towards all the other editors who have worked on developing this article, and who have provided good sources with references for their edits. Articles here are edited as a collaborative effort, so all controversial edits (that can even include single words), especially large ones (never a good idea to do without total consensus from other editors) should be proposed here, thoroughly discussed, and then only done after the other editors have had time to respond and come to a consensus decision.
Your edits will be reverted based on a lack of consensus, sourcing, references, NPOV violations, and lack of collaboration.
Start here on the talk page. Do a little bit at a time. Get consensus. Then edit. While bold editing is allowed here, it is far too common to edit too boldly.
I know that you are a beginner here, so I understand that these are beginner errors many of us have made. Please take it easy. Articles here are never finished, and are in the process of being created all the time. Your edits and you time will be wasted if they are not done in the proper manner. In such case, they will just get deleted the minute you turn you back, ad infinitum.
So....discuss first, edit later. Thank you.
PS: Remember to sign your posts using four tildes. I did it for you above. -- Fyslee 19:20, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Whoa! 

message: Pez, thank you for starting to use the talk page. We are here to work together, and it's always nice to have a good working relationship with other editors. Here are a few pointers:
* To make a proper signature, type four tildes like these ~~~~. It automatically produces your user name and the time of the edit. (This only applies to talk pages.)
* When you make edits in articles you should use edit summaries. There is a blank space designed for that at the bottom of the editing window.
* As to the introductory sentences (wikipedia doesn't use an "Introduction" section, but what is called a "lead." You can read about it here: WP:LEAD. The lead sums up the contents of the article, without anything more, different, or new. IOW the article must include the information in depth already,
* with good sources (WP:RS, WP:V). These are Wikipedia policies that must be understood before doing too much editing. With time you will get to understand them better. 
* Also read about WP:NPOV.
* Another one is WP:NPA
I have now added a welcome message to your user talk page. It has some good stuff to check out. Good luck! -- Fyslee 21:00, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A few pointers 

message: I believe that it is very important to include information about preliminary research findings.  I agree that it isn't published and peer reviewed yet; however, I think it is relevant since this is the only research that exists to date.  I'd like to add this as a new section. 
Point #4 Information about preliminary research should be included in the article:
Preliminary Research Findings
Dr. Wymore of the Oklahoma State University recruited two Oklahoma State faculty physicians who tweezed fibers from beneath the skin of some Morgellons patients. The samples were sent to the Tulsa Police Department’s forensic laboratory. The police checked the samples against carpet and clothing fibers and other materials, and conducted chemical analyses and other tests, and found no matches against any fiber in their databases. However, the fibers taken from the Morgellons patients matched each other. [source []
:There is no reason why this statement can't be used.  It is well written and cites a WP:V [secondary source] and Dr. Wymore is certainly notable.  I would make some minor changes;
:*The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette reporting on Ms. Leitao's plight noted that Dr. Randy Wymore, Oklahoma State University assistant professor of pharmacology and physiology, recruited two Oklahoma State faculty physicians who tweezed fibers from beneath the skin of some Morgellons patients. The samples were sent to the Tulsa Police Department’s forensic laboratory. The police checked the samples against carpet and clothing fibers and other materials, and conducted chemical analyses and other tests, and found no matches against any fiber in their databases. However, the fibers taken from the Morgellons patients matched each other. Harlan C Mom fights for answers on what's wrong with her son, Pittsburg Post-Gazette, July 23, 2006, retrieved October 28, 2006.
:--Dematt 03:32, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Preliminary Research Findings 

message: Make sure you copy the coded version, not just the readable version. That will keep signatures and references intact, as well as indenting and other formatting. -- Fyslee 00:00, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry, Fyslee.  I just don't understand what the coded version is or what you mean about referencing.  Can I just put the URL and you take it from there?  Thanks Pez1103 00:03, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I mean the version you see when in the editing mode. That's often the best way to copy material. You can see the referencing code format in that mode. Just find a section with the small numbers. Copy that to your own sandbox and practice. I'll make a sandbox for you. -- Fyslee 00:08, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I tried and failed at sandbox.  Pez1103 01:12, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I just used it and it works just fine. Here it is: User:Pez1103/Sandbox. -- Fyslee 12:58, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Be careful when copying 

message: I also would like a section added on Randy Wymore since he was the first scientist to research Morgellons disease.  
I would like to add this:
In 2005, Dr. Randy Wymore, from Oklahoma State University, became the first scientist to begin researching Morgellons disase.  He volunteers his free time for this research, inspired by a real empathy for the sufferers of this disease.  
“When I started looking into this, it wasn’t about treatment or figuring out what was causing this,” Wymore said. “It was really just to try and say: ‘Is there some evidence that there is a real disease here?’” He compared Morgellons fibers with everyday fibers he collected from clothes and department stores during a road trip with his family to California. Not one looked like the fibers festering out of and beneath the skin of Morgellons sufferers. Wymore is now convinced the condition is real. He said his fiber research should also silence critics who say Morgellons is a form of delusions in which patients believe parasites or bugs are attacking their skin. “Delusions of parasites is a purely psychiatric disorder,” Wymore said. “Morgellons is a physical pathology that happens to have some psychiatric effects.” 
Source: []
: Who knows what inspires Professor Wymore?  That's hardly encyclopedic,  Wymore is far more notable for his participation in the media campaign than for his research, which seems to amount to "we found some fibers we can't identify". I agree he's a big part of the story, but his "research" needs to be put in perspective. Herd of Swine 18:41, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Randy Wymore 

message: Surely there is some professional association of American dermatologists with a periodical journal.  Has anyone tried finding pro/con articles related to Morgellon's in such a publication?--Caliga10 20:30, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Caliga10, see Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, Volume 55, Issue 5 : and , and the excerpt from another article in the same issue here: .  There is an article in Nature here , which says, and I quote: "Most experts deny the disease exists" and "There really is no scientific basis at this point to believe that this is real. - Stephen Stone - President of the American Academy of Dermatology"  Herd of Swine 20:54, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggestion

message: Pez, don't change the talkpage, it changes the flow of conversation.  I know sometimes it works better for you, but it may place my comments out of context and be misleading.  Thanks;) --Dematt 22:11, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I know, it can get confusing.  That is why another reason to take it slow.  Some of us are halfway around the world and by the time we read it, there are hours of new discussions.  Also, if you use the colon: properly it will indent your conversation one tab.  The next person indents again and thats how we can keep track of who said what and when. Its fun though! --Dematt 00:36, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changing talk page 

message: Herd is making changes to the document without consulting with anyone at all.  That is really violating the rules, isn't it?   I did it because I was brand new, but Herd's changing things without even putting anything in the discussion.  It makes this whole process a bit of a farce.  Pez1103pez
:It was a small change that you had asked for (removing the implication that Wymore resigned because of the financial problems).  We don't have to vote on every change, it's a collaberative process.  There are no hard rules here.  It's just a good idea to get some consensus before making sweeping changes, especially to material that has been there for a while and that was probably also achieved by consensus.  Everyone is an editor, everyone can edit however they want.  But everyon also has to accept that others can change, delete or add to their edits.  In your case you eviscerated the article, and made it strongly POV.  Others attempted to restore balance.  That's just the way it works.  It's an endless process of information annealing. Herd of Swine 01:28, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  making changes without consulting with anyone 

message: I added "Most experts deny the disease exists", from this article .  I did this because Nature is one of the world's oldest and most respected scientific journals, and in the article they quote the president of the American Academy of Dermatology saying "There really is no scientific basis at this point to believe that this is real" and the article also states: 
:"Most dermatologists deny the disease exists, saying the people who claim to suffer from it have either common skin illnesses or psychological disorders such as delusional parasitosis, in which people become irrationally convinced that they harbor parasites. In such disorders, people often have lesions, but those are caused by the patients' own scratching and picking".
This reflects the current thinking on Morgellons from experts in the field, and needs to be represented in the article.  I suggest a section me made on "Medical community response", or similar. Herd of Swine 02:04, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: the date is in the reference, 30 August 2006 Herd of Swine 03:45, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You can't argue with a reference like that.  Nature is one of the best sources you can cite. --Dematt 04:40, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Content from the Nature article. 

message: Can we re-organize the beginning of this article?  It seems to be breaking the flow to go from the Lead to Morgellons Research Foundation and then to Symptoms.  I'll try something and you guys can let me know what you think.  We can always cahnge it back. --Dematt 04:46, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Go for it.  It's kind of evolved oddly and is due for a re-working. Herd of Swine 05:53, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Great... can you name them and cite sources for that claim?  That is helpful information.--Caliga10 14:46, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

text: No problem.--Caliga10 15:01, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestion to re-organize beginning 

message: Pez, in this edit you added 'formal' to study, which implies that informal studies have been made.  Please provide a citation to a reliable 'informal study' (which seems like a contradiction) to avoid the appearance of using weasel words to lend credibility to the subject that's not appropriate. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 17:24, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about changing it to "No clinical studies have been done on Morgellons", which is a direct quote from Dermatology times, Oct 1st, 2006  Herd of Swine 17:35, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wording question

message: Please read the comments in "further suggestions" 
I support repealing this article until the CDC finishes its research.  The potential damage of the exisiting article far outweighs any benefit.  
Pez1103 17:56, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you mean "delete" the article?--Caliga10 18:07, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

text: You are free to nominate the article as a candidate for deletion, see Wikipedia:Guide to deletion, I would not advise this at all. Herd of Swine 18:10, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was actually about to post the exact same response.--Caliga10 18:10, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Caliga - Can you make the article neutral? Pez1103 19:03, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To be perfectly honest I am not willing to commit to a substantial re-write at this time, because it seems like both you and Herd of Swine are content to make substantial changes without gaining consensus on the discussion page.  See my further comments below.--Caliga10 19:05, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Repeal the article 

message: I would like to add two quotes to the controversy section.  I have sources for both.  I think this is pivitol because the existing article implies that there may have been wrongdoing.  
"I am confident that the long-term goals were the same among the various board members — a cure for Morgellons — but the short-term goals and day-to-day operational visions were not shared," says Dr. Wymore, assistant professor of pharmacology at Oklahoma State University's Center for Health Sciences (OSU-CHS). "I am confident that there was no wrong-doing on the part of anyone." 
"Randy Wymore has resigned as director of research for the Morgellons Research Foundation, a position he held on a temporary, volunteer basis. Wymore, assistant professor of pharmacology at Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences in Tulsa, said his decision was based on schedule and a need to focus more on his university-based Morgellons Disease research.”
Herd - above you stated that you were fine with all four of the changes that I proposed.  So unless someone else objects, I will make this change when the page becomes unprotected. Pez1103 21:33, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Go for it, be bold. Herd of Swine 22:23, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy