![]() | This is the
talk page of a
redirect that targets the page: • CoolSculpting Because this page is not frequently watched, present and future discussions, edit requests and requested moves should take place at: • Talk:CoolSculpting |
![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | The contents of the Cryolipolysis page were merged into Fat removal procedures. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
![]() | The
Wikimedia Foundation's
Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see
WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see
WP:COIRESPONSE. Edits made by the below user(s) were last checked for neutrality on 31-12-2016 by Example.
|
![]() | Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent. |
Please note that "Cryolipolysis" is a trademark term owned by Zeltiq/Allergan, and is not a general term for the category. Please see US Patent & Trademark office for details. I note that there has previous discussion around this topic previously. 87.74.62.48 ( talk) 16:17, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
Are there any longer-term studies of the effectiveness of this treatment? There should be something now that it's been used for more than a year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.189.244.255 ( talk) 02:07, 10 May 2012
I have added a citation needed tag to the claim that "Cryolipolysis" is a portmanteau of "Cryogenic" & "Lipolysis"more info-www.advancehealthcare.in
I suspect that the term is not a portmanteau of these words, and instead assume it's more likely that the term has been formed from adding the prefix " cryo-" to " lipolysis".
Furthermore I feel that an English speaking medical professional is likely to be familiar with the prefix "cryo-" and it's meaning, would reasonably assume "cryolipolysis" as being formed "cryo-" and "lipolysis" and from only the term itself correctly deduce that it pertains to the freezing or near freezing temperatures and the breakdown of lipids. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.17.174 ( talk) 04:07, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
The following source does not qualify as RS and is promotional in nature, so I have placed it here.
Likewise
While we're at it the ELs need to be considered. - - MrBill3 ( talk) 07:52, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
When this article was first created in 2009, Cryolipolysis was just going through human trials and it did not exist in any significant way as a business (Zeltiq) or as a consumer product (Coolsculpting). I'd like to improve the article following COI best practices (I have a COI) and was interested in any feedback on the best way to name and structure Wikipedia's content about the medical term (Cryolipolysis), the consumer term (CoolSculpting) and the business (Zeltiq).
For example, should we
CorporateM ( Talk) 22:04, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Zeltiq (who have their own page btw) maintain that CoolSculpting and Cryolipolysis are not two terms for the same thing, as you seemed to have implied with "the medical term (Cryolipolysis), the consumer term (CoolSculpting)...".
The first matter to clear up before considering renaming and restructuring this article to be about "CoolSculpting", or the creation of a new CoolSculpting article, is whether CoolSculpting as a product even meets notability requirements. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.17.174 ( talk) 05:08, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved. Cryolipolysis can continue to exist under that name. If there are any concerns whether Zeltiq Aesthetics is notable enough for a separate article, they can be addressed via AfD or by talk page discussion. My personal opinion is there is nothing wrong with the Zeltiq Aesthetics article. If CoolSculpting is merely Zeltiq's trade name for cryolipolysis it's not evident how a mere name could have independent notability. In that case keeping it as a redirect to Cryolipolysis seems fine. EdJohnston ( talk) 05:20, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Cryolipolysis → ? – According to
The Daily Mail,
Cryolipolysis is a trademark of
Zeltiq Aesthetics, who use it in the
CoolSculpting device. The technique was developed at the Massachusetts General Hospital and licensed to Zeltiq in exchange for royalties.
[1] If Zeltiq does in fact own the trademark, that would seem to make it technically impossible for there to be other "Cryolipolysis" devices, besides counterfeits
[2] and DIY
[1]. The wording in medical journals did not make it entirely clear to me whether Cryolipolysis and CoolSculpting were virtually synonymous or whether Cryolipolysis was a much broader technique used in other applications, as different sources had slightly different wordings.
Should we have:
References
Disclosure: I have a conflict of interest. --Relisted. George Ho ( talk) 01:40, 19 January 2015 (UTC) CorporateM ( Talk) 20:22, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello, here are my two humble, technical questions about that I have about Cryolipolysis, and would very much to see answers in the article:
Thanks, Ben-Yeudith ( talk) 14:39, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
It is worth mentionning that Coolsculping is not a generic word, but indeed a registred trade mark. I am questionning if naming a commercial company in the lead is in line with WP:COVERT. May I propose to rephrase the sentence:
into:
which is more neutral and down to the point. Paulmartin357 ( talk) 06:08, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Alexbrn did revert my contribution about severe side effects. There are three parts to be discussed:
Please comment on the "poorly" sourced and the "non-sourced", one by one. I am proposing to at least request sources for the existing statement (item 3 above). I don't understand why it has been reverted. Paulmartin357 ( talk) 10:26, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
The section and sources below overinterpret what is being "approved" for this device. The FDA did not approve the safety and efficacy of Zeltiq - that is not the process of FDA review for devices. The approval was for "interstate commerce" only, and the manufacturer must comply with several regulations concerning labeling and manufacturing quality. Further points: 1) the Medscape source is not a direct source; 2) the 510K is written by the applicant - Zeltiq - not by the FDA, so the assertions about efficacy at different body parts are only the opinion of the applicant; 3) it is promotional, WP:PROMO, to recite the 510k as a source for efficacy at different body locations. -- Zefr ( talk) 02:48, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
References
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 22:36, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Was discussed here. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 10:53, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This is the
talk page of a
redirect that targets the page: • CoolSculpting Because this page is not frequently watched, present and future discussions, edit requests and requested moves should take place at: • Talk:CoolSculpting |
![]() | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | The contents of the Cryolipolysis page were merged into Fat removal procedures. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
![]() | The
Wikimedia Foundation's
Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see
WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see
WP:COIRESPONSE. Edits made by the below user(s) were last checked for neutrality on 31-12-2016 by Example.
|
![]() | Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent. |
Please note that "Cryolipolysis" is a trademark term owned by Zeltiq/Allergan, and is not a general term for the category. Please see US Patent & Trademark office for details. I note that there has previous discussion around this topic previously. 87.74.62.48 ( talk) 16:17, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
Are there any longer-term studies of the effectiveness of this treatment? There should be something now that it's been used for more than a year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.189.244.255 ( talk) 02:07, 10 May 2012
I have added a citation needed tag to the claim that "Cryolipolysis" is a portmanteau of "Cryogenic" & "Lipolysis"more info-www.advancehealthcare.in
I suspect that the term is not a portmanteau of these words, and instead assume it's more likely that the term has been formed from adding the prefix " cryo-" to " lipolysis".
Furthermore I feel that an English speaking medical professional is likely to be familiar with the prefix "cryo-" and it's meaning, would reasonably assume "cryolipolysis" as being formed "cryo-" and "lipolysis" and from only the term itself correctly deduce that it pertains to the freezing or near freezing temperatures and the breakdown of lipids. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.17.174 ( talk) 04:07, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
The following source does not qualify as RS and is promotional in nature, so I have placed it here.
Likewise
While we're at it the ELs need to be considered. - - MrBill3 ( talk) 07:52, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
When this article was first created in 2009, Cryolipolysis was just going through human trials and it did not exist in any significant way as a business (Zeltiq) or as a consumer product (Coolsculpting). I'd like to improve the article following COI best practices (I have a COI) and was interested in any feedback on the best way to name and structure Wikipedia's content about the medical term (Cryolipolysis), the consumer term (CoolSculpting) and the business (Zeltiq).
For example, should we
CorporateM ( Talk) 22:04, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
Zeltiq (who have their own page btw) maintain that CoolSculpting and Cryolipolysis are not two terms for the same thing, as you seemed to have implied with "the medical term (Cryolipolysis), the consumer term (CoolSculpting)...".
The first matter to clear up before considering renaming and restructuring this article to be about "CoolSculpting", or the creation of a new CoolSculpting article, is whether CoolSculpting as a product even meets notability requirements. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.17.174 ( talk) 05:08, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Not moved. Cryolipolysis can continue to exist under that name. If there are any concerns whether Zeltiq Aesthetics is notable enough for a separate article, they can be addressed via AfD or by talk page discussion. My personal opinion is there is nothing wrong with the Zeltiq Aesthetics article. If CoolSculpting is merely Zeltiq's trade name for cryolipolysis it's not evident how a mere name could have independent notability. In that case keeping it as a redirect to Cryolipolysis seems fine. EdJohnston ( talk) 05:20, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Cryolipolysis → ? – According to
The Daily Mail,
Cryolipolysis is a trademark of
Zeltiq Aesthetics, who use it in the
CoolSculpting device. The technique was developed at the Massachusetts General Hospital and licensed to Zeltiq in exchange for royalties.
[1] If Zeltiq does in fact own the trademark, that would seem to make it technically impossible for there to be other "Cryolipolysis" devices, besides counterfeits
[2] and DIY
[1]. The wording in medical journals did not make it entirely clear to me whether Cryolipolysis and CoolSculpting were virtually synonymous or whether Cryolipolysis was a much broader technique used in other applications, as different sources had slightly different wordings.
Should we have:
References
Disclosure: I have a conflict of interest. --Relisted. George Ho ( talk) 01:40, 19 January 2015 (UTC) CorporateM ( Talk) 20:22, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Hello, here are my two humble, technical questions about that I have about Cryolipolysis, and would very much to see answers in the article:
Thanks, Ben-Yeudith ( talk) 14:39, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
It is worth mentionning that Coolsculping is not a generic word, but indeed a registred trade mark. I am questionning if naming a commercial company in the lead is in line with WP:COVERT. May I propose to rephrase the sentence:
into:
which is more neutral and down to the point. Paulmartin357 ( talk) 06:08, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Alexbrn did revert my contribution about severe side effects. There are three parts to be discussed:
Please comment on the "poorly" sourced and the "non-sourced", one by one. I am proposing to at least request sources for the existing statement (item 3 above). I don't understand why it has been reverted. Paulmartin357 ( talk) 10:26, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
The section and sources below overinterpret what is being "approved" for this device. The FDA did not approve the safety and efficacy of Zeltiq - that is not the process of FDA review for devices. The approval was for "interstate commerce" only, and the manufacturer must comply with several regulations concerning labeling and manufacturing quality. Further points: 1) the Medscape source is not a direct source; 2) the 510K is written by the applicant - Zeltiq - not by the FDA, so the assertions about efficacy at different body parts are only the opinion of the applicant; 3) it is promotional, WP:PROMO, to recite the 510k as a source for efficacy at different body locations. -- Zefr ( talk) 02:48, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
References
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. — Community Tech bot ( talk) 22:36, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Was discussed here. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 10:53, 6 December 2018 (UTC)