Talk:Constance Kies

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Constance Kies/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Dunkleosteus77 (talk · contribs) 03:13, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Dunkleosteus77

• I don't know if that direct quote is the way to go in Early life   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  03:13, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

I tried paraphrasing the quote about nonspecific nitrogen sources. TJMSmith (talk) 14:39, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

• It seems like she's written a lot of books, so why do you single out only Copper Bioavailability and Metabolism and Sports Nutrition: Minerals and Electrolytes?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  03:13, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Good point. I moved mention of these to a new "Selected works" section. TJMSmith (talk) 14:21, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

• Why is her death in the Career section?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  03:13, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Moved this to a new section about personal life. TJMSmith (talk) 14:39, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

• It'd be better to mention her sisters' names in the Early life section where they're first brought up   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  03:13, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Done. TJMSmith (talk) 14:45, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

• I don't think hobbies should fall under the Career section either   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  03:13, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Moved to new personal life section.TJMSmith (talk) 14:45, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

• "Her research found that the need for protein, essential amino acids, and minerals did not vary among the races, or by sex or ethnicity" did you mean "the protein, essential amino acid, and mineral requirements" because the former makes it sound like people thought certain races or sexes just didn't need protein or minerals (unless you're talking about when people thought boys didn't need calcium)   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  03:13, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

I tweaked the wording of that sentence. TJMSmith (talk) 14:49, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

• "Food and nutrition department chair" for what organization?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  03:13, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

I clarified that the chair was at UNL. TJMSmith (talk) 14:57, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

• "With her college Fox, she researched the nutrition knowledge and attitudes of wheat and beef producers in Nebraska" her college Fox? Also what about the attitudes of Nebraskan farmers was she researching   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  03:13, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

There was a typo. I copy edited it. TJMSmith (talk) 14:57, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

• "investigating urea as a nitrogen source for ruminants. Her research revealed that it could be used in humans to maintain a nitrogen balance" what?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  03:13, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Fixed this. TJMSmith (talk) 14:57, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

• " 'feeding idealized patterns of essential amino acids in protein-free or parenteral feedings' " this is kind of confusing   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  03:13, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

I tried rewording this. I'm not completely sure what "idealized patterns" are. Maybe optimized? TJMSmith (talk) 17:58, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Maybe I can help, what's the exact wording in the source? Also in this case, it'd be preferable if you actually cite Kies' work   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  02:35, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

"Kies' work with nitrogen balance made important contributions to the field. By working with the premise that urea was used as a nitrogen source in ruminant animal feed (Kies et al. 1973), Kies determined that urea could also be effectively used in human metabolism to maintain nitrogen balance (Kies and Fox 1978). The practical applications of her research showed that high levels of blood urea nitrogen could be reduced if patients were fed idealized patterns of essential amino acids in protein-free or parenteral feedings (Kies 1972); by doing so, Kies hypothesized that uremic patients could use endogenous urea as a source of nitrogen for the synthesis of nonessential amino acids (Korslund et al. 1977). By showing that protein quantity was as important as protein quality, Kies established that increasing the total quantity of low-quality protein foods can support protein needs of human adults (Kies and Fox 1970)." this all comes from [1]. I actually thought it was better to cite discussion of her work rather than her studies. I'm fine either way. TJMSmith (talk) 13:15, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

I think the only important part is the last sentence   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  16:33, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Ok. I cut out and reworded that section. TJMSmith (talk) 21:23, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

• You rely too much on direct quotes for her research   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  03:13, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

I tried paraphrasing sections of her research. TJMSmith (talk) 18:09, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

• @TJMSmith: You there?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  16:27, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

@Dunkleosteus77: Yes! Thank you for these revisions/comments! I will work on them this weekend :) TJMSmith (talk) 16:41, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

I think I responded to your comments above. Please let me know if you had anything other thoughts or suggestions. Thank you, TJMSmith (talk) 18:09, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

• Why is there a ref in the Selected Works section?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  02:54, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

It is a review of her book. I usually try to include reviews of people's works, like I did here: Nancy_Marcus#Selected_works. TJMSmith (talk) 03:01, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Are you sure you got the title correct?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  05:32, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

I titled it "Review" because the database calls it "Books -- Sports Nutrition: Minerals and Electrolytes edited by Constance V. Kies and Judy Anne Driskell" which seemed overly clunky and not informative. TJMSmith (talk) 12:32, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

It looks like it's just a book summary rather than a review (like, it's an ad)   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  17:16, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

I don't have access to the full cite, so I removed it. TJMSmith (talk) 13:24, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

• Was Ruth Leverton Kies' inspiration or something or is it just that they studied the same thing?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  17:21, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

This is what the sources says, "Her research with amino acids and nitrogen excretion mirrored that of a former leading nutrition researcher at the University of Nebraska, Dr. Ruth Leverton. Similar to Leverton, Kies used controlled human feeding studies (involving subjects housed in the university's live-in facilities along with free-living subjects), a hallmark of her research program. By using human subjects to study nutrients and their interactions, these two notable women made landmark advances in the area of protein metabolism." [2] TJMSmith (talk) 00:44, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Unless they ever interacted with each other, you should just put a link to her page in the See also section   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  01:31, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

The sources I see do not explicitly state they interacted, so I reworded that section and moved her link to the see also section. TJMSmith (talk) 03:35, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

• "Kies' laboratory participants were international" contradicts "American and international students participated"   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  17:21, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

I deleted that first sentence. TJMSmith (talk) 00:44, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

• "did not vary by race, ethnicity or sex" this requires some historical context. What was the prevailing school of thought in health medicine before Kies? Did Kies change anything with this study?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  17:21, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

I think her studies covered race, ethnicity, and sex as a result of the participants being from many different countries. This is what the sources says, "Indeed, Kies' research attracted many students from foreign countries, and her laboratory took on an international ”flavor”. In exchange for housing, these international students and their American peers agreed to participate in Kies' metabolic feeding studies by eating controlled diets and carefully collecting urine and stool samples for analyses. This arrangement proved to be beneficial for both the students and for Kies, because her research showed that men's and women's needs for protein, essential amino acids and minerals do not differ by race or ethnic group. Conversely, Kies' research with plasma lipoproteins and lipids did show significant race effects, with Asian women having significantly higher values (Garcia et al. 1991)." [3] TJMSmith (talk) 00:51, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

• What's NU?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  17:21, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

I imagine Nebraska University, but the source didn't specify. I will change it. TJMSmith (talk) 00:51, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

• "Kies' advancements in the understanding of protein metabolism stemmed from her research studies" what else would they stem from?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  01:21, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

I tried to clarify that her advancements came from the unique human subjects research. Let me know if it is less ambiguous. TJMSmith (talk) 13:24, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

• Dietary protein and essential amino acids are the same thing   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  01:21, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

I fixed this. TJMSmith (talk) 13:24, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

• In Selected works, you should also put down studies which you reference in text (like her 1973 work about wheat)   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  01:21, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

I added the works. TJMSmith (talk) 13:24, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

• Do you talk about two different 1973 studies about wheat and processed food or is it the same one?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  01:21, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

The citation, a newspaper, is unclear. I tried editing it to make it less confusing. TJMSmith (talk) 13:24, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

You should find the study/studies to verify its conclusions. In fact, you should not rely on newspapers to accurately describe the results of her studies. You should directly cite her   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  16:43, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

I added the conclusions and cited the study. TJMSmith (talk) 00:52, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

• "Kies' research interest included human nutrient requirements and the interrelationships of these nutrients. A secondary research interest was the nutritional knowledge and attitudes held by different population groups" I don't get how these 2 statements are related   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:18, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

What are your suggested edits here? She had several research interests. One was primary; the other was secondary. TJMSmith (talk) 14:50, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

This is a strange distinction to make. You should just say "Kies' research interest included human nutrient requirements and how nutrients interact with each other, and awareness of and attitudes toward nutrition in different communities"   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  16:47, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

Made the switch. Thanks for the wording. TJMSmith (talk) 00:55, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

• What were the results of the nursing study? Also, was the study looking at bottle-fed, breast-fed diabetic, and breast-fed non-diabetic?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:18, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

I couldn't find the results of the study. And yes to the diabetic non-diabetic question. Is that not clear? How could it be worded better. TJMSmith (talk) 14:50, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

You should say "bottle-fed, breast-fed diabetic, and breast-fed non-diabetic" and you should read the actual study and see its conclusions   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  16:39, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

I changed the wording based on your suggestion. I couldn't find a published study. I tried searching Google Scholar [4], but am not finding anything that corresponds with this. TJMSmith (talk) 01:06, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

• You don't need to declare "Kies also investigated copper metabolism" when the following sentence makes that perfectly clear   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:18, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

I removed that sentence. TJMSmith (talk) 14:50, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

• I don't understand what "tactile nature" is supposed to mean. Do they not paint?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  15:18, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

That is what the source says. I am guessing this is tactile as in touch. I infer from the source that Kies was interested in the 3-D examples of their art i.e. weavings, carvings... TJMSmith (talk) 14:50, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

When you say "the tactile nature of" it sounds like all their art is crafts. What you could say is "Kies was interested in Inuit and Native American weaving, carving, sculpture, and pottery"   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:00, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Ok. I made the tweak. BTW the full source reads: "Dr. Kies said she enjoys art, especially Eskimo and Indian. Included among her favorites are weavings, carvings, sculpture, and pottery. 'I like items that are either tactile in actuality, or have a tactile nature in appearance.'" I was trying to capture her direct quote there about tactile characteristics. [5] TJMSmith (talk) 18:37, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

Then you can also tack on "because she was interested in art pieces she could hold/whatever variation of that"   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  16:48, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

I added that. Thanks! TJMSmith (talk) 01:09, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

• "She was also a fan of reading" reading what? Peer's journal articles? Science fiction?   User:Dunkleosteus77 |push to talk  18:00, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

The source does not specify. The source states: "She also enjoys music, and said she is classically oriented. Reading is also on the list of favorite activities." [6] TJMSmith (talk) 18:37, 4 March 2020 (UTC)