User talk:Pippin2k

CHEMENG283 Wiki Project: Biochemical mechanisms of fructose toxicity

Evolutionary background

Excessive consumption of fructose-rich foods has been suggested to contribute to negative health outcomes. Unlike glucose, whose metabolism is more rigorously controlled by the PFK1 enzyme, fructose is regulated and processed through metabolic pathways in a less complex manner. Fructokinase, the enzyme that activates fructose intracellularly via phosphorylation to commence its utilization, is not subject to negative feedback control from the downstream intermediates of glycolysis, the TCA cycle, or energy carriers. This can result in large amounts of acetyl-CoA originating from the metabolism of fructose being fed into fatty acid biosynthesis pathways. This increased flux through the fatty acid pathways results in highly elevated generation and accumulation rates for various fats. In some hibernating mammals, it is suggested that this deregulated utilization of fructose might have an advantageous adaptive role. Rapid generation of fat storage when animals feed before the winter on seasonal ripe fruits, which are high in fructose, allows them to build a significant energy storage in a short time period. In some animals that are native to locations with pronounced seasonality, this mechanism also can contribute to fat accumulation to increase robustness and survive resource-scarce winters. It is argued that this mechanism is also present in primates, including humans. Furthermore, its residual effects may cause more harm than benefit as hibernation is not a selective pressure in modern society and human metabolism has not evolved to handle excessive caloric/carbohydrate intake.

Biochemical mechanisms

Impact of fructose on carbohydrate, lipid, and purine metabolism and the consequences for the body

Moderate fruit consumption does not usually increase the blood levels of fructose since the small intestine uses it to generate glucose. However, when fructose is artificially added in foods or when excessive amounts of fructose or sucrose-rich fruit is consumed, it can noticeably reach the systemic circulation. The systemic bioavailability of fructose is positively correlated with increased de novo lipogenesis, decreased fatty acid oxidation, increased liver fat, postprandial triglycerides, cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein (LDL), high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-C, and C-reactive protein. These effects are substantially more pronounced in regards to fructose consumption when compared to excessive glucose intake. Moreover, the lipogenic effects of fructose are exacerbated with the associated uptake of saturated fatty acids. This compounding effect is quite likely fueled by diets containing fast foods that are both highly sweetened and processed in oils or high in fat.

Relation between fructose metabolism and uric acid biosynthesis

Fructose metabolism intermediates can also activate the glycolytic pathway by entering through glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate and dihydroxyacetone phosphate, which could be especially detrimental in cancer due to the Warburg effect. Transient intracellular phosphate depletion due to the excessive phosphorylation of fructose by fructokinase may also affect purine metabolism resulting in increased production of uric acid. Uric acid, in turn, may further promote lipogenesis, as well as mediate other pathological processes that play an important role in the development of metabolic syndrome, high blood pressure, and gout. Negative metabolic effects of fructose are compounded by its inability, unlike glucose, to induce satiety. This may be the reason for less controlled or excessive consumption of fructose-rich foods.

Inhibition of fructose metabolism

Hereditary fructokinase deficiency does not appear to have any apparent negative health effects in humans and may actually be associated with a better prognosis in populations where diets include large amounts of fructose. It is possible that without normal fructokinase activity, metabolism of exogenous fructose would be decreased since fructose metabolites would be able to neither feed in acetyl-CoA generation nor upregulate lipid synthesis and accumulation. The excessive amount of fructose will simply be excreted with urine resulting in fructosuria, which is virtually a harmless health condition that could be incidentally found during a medical check-up for unrelated reasons. It is shown that fructokinase inhibition might also be beneficial in ischemic acute kidney injury since, under this condition, fructose mediates oxidative stress and cell injury. It is suggested that preventing or decreasing the metabolism of exogenous fructose will be beneficial in terms of carbohydrate and lipid metabolism as well as will decrease uric acid production which is beneficial as increased uric acid buildup triggers oxidative stress and inflammation. Luteolin, an ingredient in some dietary supplements, was used in animal studies to inhibit fructose metabolism and showed beneficial effects in disrupting pathological processes mediated by fructose. However, the clinical relevance of these findings for humans is not known.

March 2021

Hello, I'm Zefr. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Fructose, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Introduce major changes and controversial topics first on the talk page, then engage in discussion to obtain WP:CON. Zefr (talk) 15:13, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

On my talk page, you said: As part of the biochemistry course that I take, I'm asked to contribute to a biochemistry-related topic on Wikipedia. This is done by others as well. Together with another person, I've chosen fructose. What exactly can I do to support the information I've posted? Is it possible that I add sources referencing scientific books and meta-analyses related to this topic? Or are direct citations expected? Also, I have a large text (almost 700 words). Should I post it all together at once? I'll appreciate any guidance.

Reversion of this edit was justified because it contains speculation from primary lab research. When addressing health on Wikipedia, we use WP:MEDRS reviews, which mainly are in medical journals publishing results from large-scale clinical trials which are mainly absent from the fructose literature. The chemical section of the fructose article seems reasonably well-covered, with little reason to add to it, as this is an established science. See the left pyramid of WP:MEDASSESS where systematic reviews and meta-analyses of large-scale human research would be suitable, if from reputable sources. I understand that your biochemistry course may motivate you to use lab research as evidence, but such content is not encyclopedic, as it is not derived from the review literature; see WP:NOTJOURNAL #6-8. Also, it seems WP:OFFTOPIC to me to address highly speculative "evolutionary" concepts when there's such weak evidence for such an effect. No reputable review articles, medical associations, or regulatory agencies support such a concept; see WP:MEDREV. You can respond here on your page. Good luck. Zefr (talk) 16:11, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Can you please have a look at this then, Zefr? Below I provide the rest of the text (which is more connected to biochemistry). Also, we were planning to include two graphical schemes showing the connection between fructose and uric acid metabolism and a general overview of how fructose is included in the metabolism.

References

It's evident from this draft that you are writing a term paper (NOTESSAY, NOTJOURNAL) rather than synthesizing established facts based on review articles. All your sources are primary research, not MEDRS reviews, and your text is a narrative of speculation (fine for a thesis or journal report) rather than review-established facts. Your text includes terms like "likely", "could be", "may also", "suggested", etc. which are not encyclopedic terms and facts. I suggest you spend some time absorbing MEDRS, MEDHOW, and WHYMEDRS to understand better the need for conclusive review sources, then write concise statements supported by high-quality reviews. Zefr (talk) 16:52, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (April 30)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DoubleGrazing was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Pippin2k/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to User:Pippin2k/sandbox, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:13, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Pippin2k! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:13, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Please don't create multiple copies; you had submitted one for AfC review, and published another copy directly into the main space (incorrectly, IMO, as the referencing falls short of the required standard). --DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:15, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Bernhard Landwehrmeyer moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Bernhard Landwehrmeyer, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:21, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

I have moved this article back into the draft space, because entire sections of it are unreferenced, which is problematic for any article, and especially so for articles on living people (see WP:BLP).

Furthermore, two sections appear to have been copied or very closely paraphrased from external sources, without anything to indicate that a suitable licence to do so exists (and in any case, proper attribution is required). I will now go and delete the said content, and would invite you to rewrite the deleted sections in your own words.

Thank you, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:24, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (May 1)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Eagleash was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Pippin2k/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to User:Pippin2k/sandbox, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Eagleash (talk) 10:52, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

May 2022

Your edit to Draft:Bernhard Landwehrmeyer has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 13:48, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello Diannaa (talk), I have removed the copyright material until we our right to use it. Will you please lift the block if any? Pippin2k (talk) 14:12, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Your review request on Draft:Bernhard Landwehrmeyer

Your message on my talk page:

Hello DoubleGrazing! I've amended the draft and added many sources, mainly from scientific journals where Prof. Landwehrmeyer is a author or contributor. I kindly ask you to review this article since it is important for him in his career advancement, which will benefit many patients with Huntington's disease, a rare, severe, debilitating disorder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pippin2k (talk • contribs) 14:20, 2 May 2022 (UTC) DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:35, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for moving the discussion here. How do I refer to you, DoubleGrazing (talk), on my page so that you're notified about my requests? Pippin2k (talk) 14:37, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

See Template:Reply to. Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:51, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi Pippin2k,

A few points in response to your request:

1. You say "it is important for him" — how do you know that; do you have some sort of an external IRL relationship with this person? If so, you should read carefully the next message which I will post under this, regarding conflicts of interest (COI). If you have such a conflict, you must declare it now. If you have no such conflict, please state so in writing in response to the COI query. Thank you.
2. You also say this article is needed for "his career advancement". I'm sorry to tell you, this is not the objective of Wikipedia; we are all volunteers, building an encyclopaedia, not to promote anyone's career. If this article one day gets published, and the good Professor gains some career advantage as a result of that, then great, but I don't think it is appropriate for Wikipedia to be used expressly for that purpose, let alone for draft reviews to be expedited so that someone can gain a benefit (even if the beneficiaries are, as you contend, patients suffering from a medical condition).
3. As to your point about the newly-added sources, listing things that the person has authored doesn't add to notability (by which I mean, authoring papers and books potentially does, but listing them on a Wikipedia article doesn't), and is often superfluous. It is usually more important to see what others have said about the person, in reliable and independent sources.

Finally, a quick note on the draft: if I were to review it, as it currently stands, I would have to decline it, because too much of the content is unreferenced. Please ensure that every material statement is supported by a reference to a reliable source. If you cannot find an acceptable source to support a statement, it must be removed.

Hope this helps, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:49, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Pippin2k. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Draft:Bernhard Landwehrmeyer, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:57, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

@DoubleGrazing: I'm am a public health activist. I know Bernhard Landwehrmeyer, who is a major contributor to research in the field of Huntington disease, through European Huntington's Disease Network. He is neither a member of my family, nor friend, nor colleague, nor competitor. I was thinking that creating a Wikipedia personal page will benefit the Huntington's disease society, which includes patients, their families, doctors, and researches throughout the world and will familiarize a broader audience about his important contribution in the public health arena. Is this a correct COI statement? Pippin2k (talk) 15:16, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bernhard Landwehrmeyer (June 29)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Gusfriend was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Bernhard Landwehrmeyer and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Bernhard Landwehrmeyer, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Gusfriend (talk) 11:29, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Bernhard Landwehrmeyer has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Bernhard Landwehrmeyer. Thanks! Somej (talk) 21:00, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bernhard Landwehrmeyer has been accepted

Bernhard Landwehrmeyer, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 20% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Somej (talk) 21:05, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Pippin2k. Thank you for creating Bernhard Landwehrmeyer. User:Scope creep, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Great article!!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Scope creep}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

scope_creepTalk 15:12, 7 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your work and high opinion of the article! Pippin2k (talk) 16:43, 23 September 2022 (UTC)