User talk:Diamonddavej

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] William James Sidis

Hey Dave, I'm going to make a few grammatical/organizational changes to the autism refernces in William James Sidis. The mention of autism having genetic components probably belongs in the autism article, so I'm taking out that piece. Just giving you the heads up! Tim McCormack 18:57, 2004 Oct 12 (UTC)

Thanks for that - Diamond Dave

[edit] Dwarves etc

Hi Diamonddave, I've just looked at David Icke and wanted to tell you how much I laughed at your story about the leader who had a small dwarf planted in his intestines by Mexico with the help of the UN. LOL. I also liked your observation that insane people are the ones without followers . . . SlimVirgin 04:36, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Formal Thought Disorder

I put an NPOV tag on the page. I request you show the information. As the discussion page would show, I'm a tad not understanding of things and not particularly clear. I'm aware of this. If there is a distinct link between misdiangosed of schizophrenia (Which there is, I know a person who have been misdiagnosed and are asperger's syndrome), and it is based on formal thought disorder, by definition it belongs in the formal thought disorder page. You're clearly far better equipped to handle this than me.J. M. 07:40, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Laser Safety

Dave,

Why are you so focused on "boiling of the vitreous" as the damage mode in the eye to receive emphasis in the introductory part of the Laser Safety article? The primary damage from visible and near IR radiation is heat burn to the retina that damages or destroys retinal nerve cells, producing a blind spot. This is clearly illustrated in the the abstract of a Nd:YAG laser injury report that you recently provided a link to. Pzavon 01:38, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

The thermal and boiling etc. are over emphasised because I have yet improve that section by including metabolic stress effects. It may end up as a separate section. As far as I understand, intense laser light can cause non-thermal injury, in particular to cone cells (colour sensitive cells), via Phototoxicity. Intense laser light can cause cone cells to run out of oxygen, sugar, calcium or build up toxic levels of waste products (lactic acid) and die. I have university access to medical journals. I will look up Pubmed and appropriate references to make sure the info is correct. Should be done in the next 24 hours. If you know more about phototoxicity, then add the info.
Diamond Dave 28/06/2006 14:10 UT
Just read an interesting article - "Light damage to the retina occurs through three general mechanisms involving thermal, mechanical, or photochemical effects." Heating the retina by just 10 C is enough to kill photoreceptors, scary. [1] Diamond Dave 28/06/2006 14:25 UT
I would expect that laser burns will ocure before loss of oxygen or those other metabolic effects you mention if the laser is powerful enough to be called intense. Metabolic effects will be an issue only if the beam power is low enough NOT to cause a burn. Therefore the burn is the primary effect to be concerned with.
With regard to medical literature, make sure you are looking at reports of true studies (of which there are many), not accounts of clinical observations where there may be more speculation and less solid support for suggested causes. Pzavon 00:30, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
It is correct that powerful lasers damage the retina via heating. However, heating does not seem to explain the damage caused by laser pointers. Calculations indicate that the heating of the retina should be insufficient to cause damage. Other, non-thermal mechanisms seem to be responsible, they appear to operate only if a person stares at a laser pointer beam for several seconds or more. One mechanism proposed is oxidative stress. The basic safety calculations that rely only on estimating the thermal effects on the retina, cannot properly asses risk given that there are children and even adults foolish enough to stare at a 1 to 5 mW laser. That is why the UK bans limits to <1mW, but its not enforced.
Yes, I am aware of controlled studies that involve shining laser light onto the retinas of people about to have an eye removed. I will read those studies and update accordingly. Also there is the issue of more powerful green lasers coming on the market, exploiting legal loop-holes. I recently bought a Class IIIb 70mW 532 nm laser...thus my sudden interest in laser safety. Thanks for your help in improving my contribution. Diamond Dave 29/06/2006 13:10 UT
My point with regard to proposed non-thermal injury mechanisms is that they are NOT connected to "powerful" lasers, as those are the ones that clearly cause thermal injuries. It is with exposure to the light from less powerful lasers that these mechanisms have been proposed. Pzavon 01:40, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I agree. I didn’t realise that you thought I was disagreeing with you, thus my delay in understanding your point. High power lasers cause immediate damage by thermal and perhaps also (of the laser is powerful enough) explosive effects too, whereas lower power lasers cause photochemical effect in isolation, a form of damage that takes several second to occur. That is what I wrote in the article, that’s the important thing. Perhaps it should be made more clear. Diamond Dave 30/06/2006 20:00 UT

[edit] Azeztulite

Hi. I've just categorized your article on Azeztulite. Someone has proposed to merge that article into Quartz which makes some sense but I suppose it could also live on its own. In particular it would help if you created an article on "fake minerals" and even a category if there are enough articles to warrant that. I was a bit confused by the concept since it suggests that Azeztulite is not a mineral. As I understand it, it is a mineral (since it's just quartz), albeit not a miraculous one. Cheers. Pascal.Tesson 05:52, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] License tagging for Image:Hydrothermal Breccia.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Hydrothermal Breccia.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:07, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Alexithymia page

Hi Dave. I think you used to be on the Alexithymia chatsite, I was sorry to see you go, as you have some great ideas on the subject!! I just wanted to let you know there is a bit of activity on the Wikipedia Alexithymia entry, and thought you might like to have a look, seeings you have been a main contributer. Its mostly me writing, but it felt like there was a debate coming on.

Yes, I visited the chatsite. Thanks for the info, I just visited the Wikipedia Alexithymia entry and I'm 75% happy with it. I know Prof. Fitzgerald personally, from speaking with him and reading his papers, he believes that Alexithymia and Asperger's generally (85%) describe the same group of people who were described twice by different schools of thought. Just like two blind people who visit the zoo, who touch an elephant, one says its like a tree and the other says its like a brush! They are both right. That has been lost from the article. --Diamonddavej 02:10, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] silence at Talk:Radiation hormesis

I posted a reply to you at Talk:Radiation hormesis, in a day or two, I will take your continued silence there as tacit consent to all but point 4. Pdbailey 15:22, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 2008 Lincolnshire earthquake

Updated DYK query On 2 March 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 2008 Lincolnshire earthquake, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 04:26, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 2008 Market Rasen earthquake

Hi Diamonddave, I want to compliment you on your excellent expansion of 2008 Lincolnshire earthquake; the technical background you added is great.

As to your query on the talk page regarding the BGS official name, I am not sure of the answer. I thought the most likely official name would be 2008 Market Rasen earthquake, which is why I created 2008 Market Rasen earthquake on Feb 27th, although it was later merged into 2008 Lincolnshire earthquake.

If the official name is 2008 Market Rasen earthquake afterall, then I suppose the content of 2008 Lincolnshire earthquake can be merged into 2008 Market Rasen earthquake which still exists as a redirect. - Neparis (talk) 00:54, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your edits to Radiation hormesis

In a controversial article like Radiation hormesis the citations are very important: thanks for the huge effort you're putting in to sort them out. --Old Moonraker (talk) 11:57, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. My interest in radiation hormesis was reignited by the study of Thompson et al. (2008), they found that low level radon exposure appears to decrease lung cancer risk by 60%. The publication of their report was delayed by several years because they could not get their data to fit the Linear no-threshold model. --Diamonddavej (talk) 12:14, 1 April 2008 (UTC)