Talk:Epithelial sodium channel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Proposed merger

This article seems to be about the same thing as Amiloride-sensitive sodium channel --PhiJ 21:16, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

I think so, too. I will try to merge the artices tomorrow. Any preference which headword should be used? --NEUROtiker 00:34, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm afraid I don't really know anything about the subject, so which would be best I have no clue about. --PhiJ 13:47, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
Their are many different types of sodium channels in the body. The Amiloride-sensitive sodium channel and Epithelial sodium channel are just two types. They shouldn't be merged. It would be like merging the articles for Toyota Camry and Corolla. They kinda look the same and do the same thing, but they are not the same. D-rew 23:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
According to the Epithelial sodium channel article though, it is just another name for the same thing. Also if you google it, you find that there are definitely amiloride sensitive peithelial sodium channel, so if they are not the same there is obviously something to be said about it. Do you think you could do this please, as you obviously have some knowlage about this. --PhiJ 16:28, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Oops, sorry, but i was incorrect before. I had always thought amiloride-sensitive Na+ and epithelial Na+ channels to be different, but they are evidently just shorthand for Amiloride-sensitive epithelial Na+ channels. Even going to the external link under either page you can see the longer term. Sorry for the confusion, but now i vote for merger. D-rew 23:17, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

FYI the amiloride sensitive Na channel and ENac are definately the same thing - m clunes

That is why people who are experts in topics should be the only ones to comment or edit. It creates a lot of recorrections and misconceptions in some articles because people jump in before they really understand the subject matter - SteveD. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.217.251.167 (talk) 03:26, 1 May 2008 (UTC) There does need to be an update of this. For example the stoichiometry has been determined. SteveD. 3rd May 2008. 17:28 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.168.20.223 (talk) 07:29, 3 May 2008 (UTC)