Talk:Eating disorder

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Stuff their emotions away[edit]

"Stuff their emotions away?" I doubt this is actually the current clinical thinking about eating disorders. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.38.147.116 (talkcontribs) 04:53, May 6, 2006 (UTC)

Using news articles as sources for scientific fact[edit]

News articles are often not reliable enough to be used as scientific fact, especially if they are anecdotal. I have spotted a couple of claims that rely on such sources in this article. Anecdotal sources are not good enough as the case might be rare or just a coincidence. For example, if you know somebody who has smoked all their life, yet never been sick and lived until they were a hundred, it does not mean that smoking is safe. It is therefore not meaningful to mention. Additionally, news sources have a lower standard of demonstrating proof in comparison to scientific articles. JustACritic (talk) 12:29, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi JustACritic, you are correct about news article not being reliable enough for biomedical claims. See this guide about how to fix that. Feel free to be bold and improve the article yourself :) Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 12:43, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Venn diagram"[edit]

2603:8000:E503:153E:EC2A:B28D:7295:33F5, you removed what you called the Venn Diagram (the table) comparing/contrasting OCD and eating disorders. I don't see why you'd remove it (at least for the reason you said in your edit summary): it is simply summarizing/visually presenting the information in the paragraph(s) surrounding it. There is significant overlap/comorbidity between the two, and the article text goes into similarities and differences. Can you explain why you think the table should be removed? Kimen8 (talk) 19:02, 23 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the table because it's unsourced and doesn't accurately summarize any of the information in the introduction. For example, there's no mention of perfectionism, intrusive thoughts, or genetics anywhere in the introduction. Just because the information appears later in the article doesn't mean the table belongs in the introduction. Furthermore, the table is sloppy and confusing, given that tables and venn diagrams are not interchangeable visual media.
The user who added it (Asollers) also added the same table on the OCD article on the same day (3 October 2022). The table was removed by Treetoes023 on 28 January 2023‎. I believe I'm following suite in deleting the table here as well. If it belongs elsewhere in the article, that's for someone else to decide. 2603:8000:E503:153E:9C50:6263:EFA2:A707 (talk) 01:14, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Modern Eating Disorders and Improper generalization[edit]

There seems to be a lack of modern comprehension and revision on the topic of "Eating Disorder". There are emerging eating disorders such as Orthorexia that are now part of the conversation, speaking debate. While there may be reservations about including them in this topic, they are undeniably real and affecting individuals at present time. There is also improper generalization and wrong use of words that may be insensitive our irrelevant to the actual cause as to why someone has an eating disorder. Someone prior to me brought this concern to the table stating why the use of "stuffing emotions away" was picked as a proper statement for eating disorder. Karemblyvilla (talk) 04:32, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]