Talk:GuLF Study

This article is part of WikiProject Alabama, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Alabama on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AlabamaWikipedia:WikiProject AlabamaTemplate:WikiProject AlabamaAlabama articles

Florida Low‑importance

	Florida portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Florida. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.FloridaWikipedia:WikiProject FloridaTemplate:WikiProject FloridaFlorida articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Louisiana / Mississippi C‑class Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Louisiana portal This article is supported by WikiProject Louisiana (assessed as Low-importance).
	Mississippi portal This article is supported by WikiProject Mississippi (assessed as Low-importance).

Disaster management C‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Environment Low‑importance

	Environment portal This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine C‑class Low‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Occupational Safety and Health Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occupational Safety and Health, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to occupational safety and health on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Occupational Safety and HealthWikipedia:WikiProject Occupational Safety and HealthTemplate:WikiProject Occupational Safety and HealthOccupational Safety and Health articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from GuLF Study appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 15 July 2013 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the US GuLF Study is visiting 20,000 clean-up workers from the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill (pictured) to collect blood, hair, urine, toenail and domestic dust samples, looking for health effects?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2013/July. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/GuLF Study.

Wikipedia

Sourcing edit

Latest comment: 10 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion

Hi Gandydancer, regarding this edit, for any medical claim it's better to source the material directly to the GuLF Study, or to another medical source discussing the study, rather than to a newspaper reporting on it. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 19:45, 9 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

I see you added a press release from the NIEHS. Can you say which part supports the edit, and can we not use the study itself as the source (whatever it is publishing)? SlimVirgin ^(talk) 23:51, 9 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hi Slim, I was still working on it and planned to ask you for an opinion. As far as I can tell, they have not released their study. Do you think I should delete my edit? Best, Gandy Gandydancer (talk) 00:07, 10 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

Slim, I am using this as a guide:

Statements and information from reputable major medical and scientific bodies may be valuable encyclopedic sources. These bodies include the U.S. National Academies (including the Institute of Medicine and the National Academy of Sciences), the British National Health Service, the U.S. National Institutes of Health and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the World Health Organization. The reliability of these sources range from formal scientific reports, which can be the equal of the best reviews published in medical journals, through public guides and service announcements, which have the advantage of being freely readable, but are generally less authoritative than the underlying medical literature.

I need to get this right as I am using it in the Health article as well. Gandydancer (talk) 00:30, 10 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

Some information from the study has been made available during conferences (e.g. this one). There's nothing about published papers on their website. We should probably email them to ask how we can keep this article updated.

In the meantime, yes, that edit needs a MEDRS-compliant source. The newspaper's source was this conference in January 2013. The reporter quotes Richard Kwok, staff scientist with the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences' chronic disease epidemiology group: "Initial research already confirms that those working on vessels during the spill cleanup as roustabouts or floor hands had higher exposures to the chemicals of concern than those who worked inside the ship, Kwok said." But it's not clear whether Kwok said this during a presentation or an interview with the reporter. What we need is Kwok's paper so that we can be very precise. The material about the women is from a separate study, WaTCH. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 00:39, 10 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

I'm moving this here for now, as I can't find it anywhere except in that newspaper article, which was copied in the NIEHS press release.

Richard Kwok of the NIEHS said in January 2013 that early research suggested that people working as roustabouts or floor hands on ships during the spill had a higher exposure to certain chemicals than those who worked inside the ship. He also said that the chemicals to which the workers were exposed were more likely to have come from the BP oil than from the diesel or gasoline fumes to which they were also exposed. Early results of another study, Women and Their Children's Health (WaTCH), indicated a statistically significant relationship between the reported symptoms of 244 women enrolled in the study and their exposure to the spill.^[1]

^
Mark Schleifstein, "BP Deepwater Horizon spill: Scientists say seafood safe, but health effects being measured", The Times-Picayune, 22 January 2013.
- "BP Deepwater Horizon spill: Scientists say seafood safe, but health effects being measured", National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, press release, February–May 2013, pp. 18–19.

SlimVirgin ^(talk) 04:34, 11 December 2013 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on GuLF Study. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:49, 24 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Add topic

[Schleifstein22Jan2013-1] Mark Schleifstein, "BP Deepwater Horizon spill: Scientists say seafood safe, but health effects being measured", The Times-Picayune, 22 January 2013.
"BP Deepwater Horizon spill: Scientists say seafood safe, but health effects being measured", National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, press release, February–May 2013, pp. 18–19.

[2] "BP Deepwater Horizon spill: Scientists say seafood safe, but health effects being measured", National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, press release, February–May 2013, pp. 18–19.

[1]