This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the
Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:
|
On 14 November 2016, Frederick Banting was linked from Google, a high-traffic website. ( Traffic) All prior and subsequent edits to the article are noted in its revision history. |
A HA is a Hectare. It's not in the article, just noticed that. Thanks for pointing that out. - Mike
(The article mentions that the farm under dispute is "100 acre (40 ha)". What is a 'ha'? A unit of measure? I didn't want to take it out, but felt that it should be questioned. -- Mechcozmo 21:19, 13 June 2006 (UTC))
This article is about Banting, not the place to re-write scientific history. Stevenscollege 10:14, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
On further inspection of whats written in "Paulescu's discovery of insulin" and "Nobel Prize controversy" nothing was supported by an external reference, so its gone. Stevenscollege 10:23, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
We are not re-writing history, merely telling the truth. Banting did not discover insulin first, it was Nicolae Paulescu. In fact, there is quite a lot of evidence for this, far more than for Banting.
I understand that there are a number of people who would like to claim Nicolas Paulesco was the legitimate discoverer of insulin/pancreatin. While the academic debates will continue, I'd like to suggest that there is another avanue that hasn't been explored. Paulesco patented his process in Romania in 1921, and the American patent for Banting's version came later. Nevertheless, if Paulesco's claim is legitimate and similar enough to the Banting method, Paulesco's patent would void Eli Lilly's patent, and both Eli Lilly and the University of Toronto would owe Romania (or Paulesco's estate) a lot of money. This is a tangible question that can be resolved in court, and I would suggest that anybody who wants to champion Paulesco's claim to insulin should try doing it this way. If the courts rule in Paulesco's favor, he would not only be vindicated as the discoverer of insulin, but his descendants and country would probably profit from it.
That is just Canadian bullcrap. People have the right to know the truth! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.138.195.202 ( talk) 10:13, 4 May 2007 (UTC).
I'm serious. LEARN THE TRUTH. Frederick Banting does not deserve the Nobel Prize. Canadian bullshit!!! Salvadoradi ( talk) 22:58, 21 February 2008 (UTC) YOURE RIGHT !!!!!!!!!!!!
The problem, if there is a problem, in my opinion, is the use of the word "discovered". Long before Banting or Paulescu did any research, it was already as good as accepted that the pancreas produces a hormone which is released into the bloodstream, an insufficiency or lack of which manifests itself as diabetes. It was one of those things where you already know that something exists and what it does, but you are trying to isolate it in a usable form. The notion that Banting set out to ascertain the cause of diabetes and ended up discovering insulin is wrong. He didn't - neither did Paulescu. A number of people had tried for years to capture the pure hormone from a pancreatic extract - and it is anyone's guess as to how pure their samples were or whether their methods would have led to usable supplies of insulin in large quantities. That fact is that apart from Banting, none of the others pursued their work to a stage of commercial production of the pure hormone.
What Banting did was to devise a way of separating the two functions of the pancreas in order to facilitate the extraction of the hormone. Once that was achieved, they had something to work with, and from there it led rapidly to the purification and then manufacture on an industrial scale.
If you play around with words, you could make an argument to the effect that no-one actually discovered insulin. But the Nobel prize was awarded for "the discovery of insulin". That is a historic fact, and this is an encyclopaedia. It is not a forum for arguing that the prize was wrongly worded. 82.29.215.250 ( talk) 23:09, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
I think the article should mention that the Nobel Prize was awarded in error or at least that there is a "controversy" concering this. This would make the article consistend with
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolae_Paulescu#Nobel_Prize_controversy
-Paul- (
talk) 10:16, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
1. The awarding of the Prize to Banting and Macleod has been controversial from the start. Most of the controversy surrounded who was not included in the award. The Nobel committee's own website has already discussed this, and can be used as a link: http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/articles/lindsten/index.html
The bottom line regarding this is that nobody except Banting and Macleod were nominated, and the Nobel Prize rules state that only people who are nominated can win. From the beginning, however, there was talk that others should have been included, but weren't. Most notabley, the day after the announcement, Banting complained that Best should have been included, and shared his half of the prize money with Best, and Macleod claimed Collip should have been included, and likewise split his prize money with Collip. There were others who should probably have been included as well, including Paulesco.
2. The awarding of the Prize to Banting is not an 'error' in the sense of the Nobel Committee not knowing of Paulesco's work, as some have suggested. It is clear that the Nobel Committee did the necessary background research on the insulin work that preceded Banting's, because they mentioned the history of insulin research in the 1923 Nobel Prize presentation speech before giving Banting and Macleod the award. Here is the link to the speech: http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/1923/press.html
The relevant passage is here, where Paulesco is mentioned. "Amongst these I should like especially to mention Zuelzer, who in 1908 produced an extract which was undoubtedly effective, but which also showed injurious by-effects-consequently it could not be used to any great extent therapeutically-and also Forschback, Scott, Murlin, Kleiner, Paulesco, and many others." ( JGDo ( talk) 01:28, 24 February 2009 (UTC))
The article claims that Banting was assigned only one assistant, a graduate student, Charles Best. It was my understanding that A) Banting was originally assigned two assistants, Charles Best and E. Clark Noble, and B) Both Best and Noble were not graduate students, but 4th year undergraduates.
Does anybody have an objection to me mentioning E. Clark Noble in this article?
While Banting was originally given two lab assistants, for reasons that are still controversial, only Best ended up helping Banting for the summer, and Noble did not. The controversy surrounds the story that a coin toss determined who would work with Banting, and that Best won the toss. Banting and Noble both claimed there was a coin toss, and Best claimed there wasn't, for reasons that have been questioned (in various biographies). At any rate, while Noble didn't get to help Banting, he was subsequently hired by Macleod to work on fish-derived insulin, and was involved in many of the early papers regarding the characterization of insulin. Thus, I think Clark Noble, who was a good friend of Charles Best, deserves to get a mention as one of the two lab assistants that were originally assigned to help Banting. ( JGDo ( talk) 01:41, 24 February 2009 (UTC))
The assertion on Banting (crater) is that the crater was named in honour of Frederick Banting's contributions to medicine, not 'named after his brother' as asse-- User:Brenont ( talk) 20:54, 5 October 2013 (UTC)rted in this article.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 7 external links on
Frederick Banting. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 00:40, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Frederick Banting. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 17:45, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
Frederick Banting is being mentioned on Google Doogle regarding Quasquicentennial (125th) anniversary since day of his birth. Honors/Awards section should be updated to reflect Google Doodle mention, maybe others on the Quasquicentennial milestone. Ryan ( talk) 06:15, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Delete word [England's] from [In 1934 he was knighted by England's King George V.] This is an incorrect adjective as George V was not King of England but of the United Kingdom plus many other countries, including Canada. Please see article
/info/en/?search=George_V for more details. Current wording suggests an honour granted by a foreign power rather than by the Canadian Head of State (in which capacity George V was acting when Knighting Banting).
89.206.252.11 ( talk) 11:26, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Done - by another - Arjayay ( talk) 08:50, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
The article currently includes this strange sentence:
Why is the qualifier "according to Mackey" included? Is it not known to be a fact that Banting died from his injuries the next day? The crash occurred at a named, settled place; were there not witnesses who saw Banting and treated his injuries during the intervening day or so? We seem to be suggesting doubt where none exists. TypoBoy ( talk) 15:25, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
The 1st paragraph of section "Early Years" states
"In 1910, he started at Victoria College, part of the University of Toronto, in the General Arts program. After failing his first year, he petitioned to join the medical program in 1912 and was accepted. He began medical school in September 1912.[7]:28–29"
This section is unclear to me. Did he fail his first year of college and then apply to medical school? Or did he apply to medical school in 1910 or 1911 and was rejected? Can someone with more knowledge of the subject edit for clarity? Thanks!-- Wysockat85 ( talk) 16:44, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Is it true that Banting gave away the patent on insulin because he wanted it to be available to all who need it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.207.116.226 ( talk) 19:35, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Provide citation for location of Banting's grave in Toronto. Located under "Personal Life"
Tordenois ( talk) 20:52, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Frederick Banting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.mcgill.ca/secretariat/files/secretariat/hon-alph_2.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:04, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Frederick Banting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:25, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
There is a music video about him, it is what caused me to look up this article: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=He7X5jGt8lY 79.240.170.82 ( talk) 06:45, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
How is it possible that there's no discussion in this piece of his anti-Semitism, as documented by Canadian historian Michael Bliss in Banting: A Biography? Banting is reported to have said "You know if I'd known so many Jews had diabetes, I don't think I'd ever have gone into [insulin research.] On another occasion, Banting told his secretary, "...how hard it is to keep fending off people who want insulin. And besides, they're mostly Jewish." [1] Randal Oulton ( talk) 22:17, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
This article says that Banting was the youngest of five children, but the article on him in the Dictionary of Canadian Biography says he was the youngest of six children. Rollo August ( talk) 21:26, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Banting died during the war in an aircraft but there is no mention of this in the article. There is an external reference link but it's pretty unclear in the article itself. 80.193.232.49 ( talk) 13:13, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the
Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:
|
On 14 November 2016, Frederick Banting was linked from Google, a high-traffic website. ( Traffic) All prior and subsequent edits to the article are noted in its revision history. |
A HA is a Hectare. It's not in the article, just noticed that. Thanks for pointing that out. - Mike
(The article mentions that the farm under dispute is "100 acre (40 ha)". What is a 'ha'? A unit of measure? I didn't want to take it out, but felt that it should be questioned. -- Mechcozmo 21:19, 13 June 2006 (UTC))
This article is about Banting, not the place to re-write scientific history. Stevenscollege 10:14, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
On further inspection of whats written in "Paulescu's discovery of insulin" and "Nobel Prize controversy" nothing was supported by an external reference, so its gone. Stevenscollege 10:23, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
We are not re-writing history, merely telling the truth. Banting did not discover insulin first, it was Nicolae Paulescu. In fact, there is quite a lot of evidence for this, far more than for Banting.
I understand that there are a number of people who would like to claim Nicolas Paulesco was the legitimate discoverer of insulin/pancreatin. While the academic debates will continue, I'd like to suggest that there is another avanue that hasn't been explored. Paulesco patented his process in Romania in 1921, and the American patent for Banting's version came later. Nevertheless, if Paulesco's claim is legitimate and similar enough to the Banting method, Paulesco's patent would void Eli Lilly's patent, and both Eli Lilly and the University of Toronto would owe Romania (or Paulesco's estate) a lot of money. This is a tangible question that can be resolved in court, and I would suggest that anybody who wants to champion Paulesco's claim to insulin should try doing it this way. If the courts rule in Paulesco's favor, he would not only be vindicated as the discoverer of insulin, but his descendants and country would probably profit from it.
That is just Canadian bullcrap. People have the right to know the truth! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.138.195.202 ( talk) 10:13, 4 May 2007 (UTC).
I'm serious. LEARN THE TRUTH. Frederick Banting does not deserve the Nobel Prize. Canadian bullshit!!! Salvadoradi ( talk) 22:58, 21 February 2008 (UTC) YOURE RIGHT !!!!!!!!!!!!
The problem, if there is a problem, in my opinion, is the use of the word "discovered". Long before Banting or Paulescu did any research, it was already as good as accepted that the pancreas produces a hormone which is released into the bloodstream, an insufficiency or lack of which manifests itself as diabetes. It was one of those things where you already know that something exists and what it does, but you are trying to isolate it in a usable form. The notion that Banting set out to ascertain the cause of diabetes and ended up discovering insulin is wrong. He didn't - neither did Paulescu. A number of people had tried for years to capture the pure hormone from a pancreatic extract - and it is anyone's guess as to how pure their samples were or whether their methods would have led to usable supplies of insulin in large quantities. That fact is that apart from Banting, none of the others pursued their work to a stage of commercial production of the pure hormone.
What Banting did was to devise a way of separating the two functions of the pancreas in order to facilitate the extraction of the hormone. Once that was achieved, they had something to work with, and from there it led rapidly to the purification and then manufacture on an industrial scale.
If you play around with words, you could make an argument to the effect that no-one actually discovered insulin. But the Nobel prize was awarded for "the discovery of insulin". That is a historic fact, and this is an encyclopaedia. It is not a forum for arguing that the prize was wrongly worded. 82.29.215.250 ( talk) 23:09, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
I think the article should mention that the Nobel Prize was awarded in error or at least that there is a "controversy" concering this. This would make the article consistend with
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicolae_Paulescu#Nobel_Prize_controversy
-Paul- (
talk) 10:16, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
1. The awarding of the Prize to Banting and Macleod has been controversial from the start. Most of the controversy surrounded who was not included in the award. The Nobel committee's own website has already discussed this, and can be used as a link: http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/articles/lindsten/index.html
The bottom line regarding this is that nobody except Banting and Macleod were nominated, and the Nobel Prize rules state that only people who are nominated can win. From the beginning, however, there was talk that others should have been included, but weren't. Most notabley, the day after the announcement, Banting complained that Best should have been included, and shared his half of the prize money with Best, and Macleod claimed Collip should have been included, and likewise split his prize money with Collip. There were others who should probably have been included as well, including Paulesco.
2. The awarding of the Prize to Banting is not an 'error' in the sense of the Nobel Committee not knowing of Paulesco's work, as some have suggested. It is clear that the Nobel Committee did the necessary background research on the insulin work that preceded Banting's, because they mentioned the history of insulin research in the 1923 Nobel Prize presentation speech before giving Banting and Macleod the award. Here is the link to the speech: http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/1923/press.html
The relevant passage is here, where Paulesco is mentioned. "Amongst these I should like especially to mention Zuelzer, who in 1908 produced an extract which was undoubtedly effective, but which also showed injurious by-effects-consequently it could not be used to any great extent therapeutically-and also Forschback, Scott, Murlin, Kleiner, Paulesco, and many others." ( JGDo ( talk) 01:28, 24 February 2009 (UTC))
The article claims that Banting was assigned only one assistant, a graduate student, Charles Best. It was my understanding that A) Banting was originally assigned two assistants, Charles Best and E. Clark Noble, and B) Both Best and Noble were not graduate students, but 4th year undergraduates.
Does anybody have an objection to me mentioning E. Clark Noble in this article?
While Banting was originally given two lab assistants, for reasons that are still controversial, only Best ended up helping Banting for the summer, and Noble did not. The controversy surrounds the story that a coin toss determined who would work with Banting, and that Best won the toss. Banting and Noble both claimed there was a coin toss, and Best claimed there wasn't, for reasons that have been questioned (in various biographies). At any rate, while Noble didn't get to help Banting, he was subsequently hired by Macleod to work on fish-derived insulin, and was involved in many of the early papers regarding the characterization of insulin. Thus, I think Clark Noble, who was a good friend of Charles Best, deserves to get a mention as one of the two lab assistants that were originally assigned to help Banting. ( JGDo ( talk) 01:41, 24 February 2009 (UTC))
The assertion on Banting (crater) is that the crater was named in honour of Frederick Banting's contributions to medicine, not 'named after his brother' as asse-- User:Brenont ( talk) 20:54, 5 October 2013 (UTC)rted in this article.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 7 external links on
Frederick Banting. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 00:40, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Frederick Banting. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 17:45, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
Frederick Banting is being mentioned on Google Doogle regarding Quasquicentennial (125th) anniversary since day of his birth. Honors/Awards section should be updated to reflect Google Doodle mention, maybe others on the Quasquicentennial milestone. Ryan ( talk) 06:15, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Delete word [England's] from [In 1934 he was knighted by England's King George V.] This is an incorrect adjective as George V was not King of England but of the United Kingdom plus many other countries, including Canada. Please see article
/info/en/?search=George_V for more details. Current wording suggests an honour granted by a foreign power rather than by the Canadian Head of State (in which capacity George V was acting when Knighting Banting).
89.206.252.11 ( talk) 11:26, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Done - by another - Arjayay ( talk) 08:50, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
The article currently includes this strange sentence:
Why is the qualifier "according to Mackey" included? Is it not known to be a fact that Banting died from his injuries the next day? The crash occurred at a named, settled place; were there not witnesses who saw Banting and treated his injuries during the intervening day or so? We seem to be suggesting doubt where none exists. TypoBoy ( talk) 15:25, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
The 1st paragraph of section "Early Years" states
"In 1910, he started at Victoria College, part of the University of Toronto, in the General Arts program. After failing his first year, he petitioned to join the medical program in 1912 and was accepted. He began medical school in September 1912.[7]:28–29"
This section is unclear to me. Did he fail his first year of college and then apply to medical school? Or did he apply to medical school in 1910 or 1911 and was rejected? Can someone with more knowledge of the subject edit for clarity? Thanks!-- Wysockat85 ( talk) 16:44, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Is it true that Banting gave away the patent on insulin because he wanted it to be available to all who need it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.207.116.226 ( talk) 19:35, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Provide citation for location of Banting's grave in Toronto. Located under "Personal Life"
Tordenois ( talk) 20:52, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Frederick Banting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.mcgill.ca/secretariat/files/secretariat/hon-alph_2.pdfWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:04, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Frederick Banting. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 07:25, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
There is a music video about him, it is what caused me to look up this article: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=He7X5jGt8lY 79.240.170.82 ( talk) 06:45, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
How is it possible that there's no discussion in this piece of his anti-Semitism, as documented by Canadian historian Michael Bliss in Banting: A Biography? Banting is reported to have said "You know if I'd known so many Jews had diabetes, I don't think I'd ever have gone into [insulin research.] On another occasion, Banting told his secretary, "...how hard it is to keep fending off people who want insulin. And besides, they're mostly Jewish." [1] Randal Oulton ( talk) 22:17, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
This article says that Banting was the youngest of five children, but the article on him in the Dictionary of Canadian Biography says he was the youngest of six children. Rollo August ( talk) 21:26, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Banting died during the war in an aircraft but there is no mention of this in the article. There is an external reference link but it's pretty unclear in the article itself. 80.193.232.49 ( talk) 13:13, 13 June 2024 (UTC)