This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Protein allergy redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Protein allergy received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
![]() | This article was the subject of an educational assignment that ended on 2010. Further details are available here. |
A very start! You might take a look at this article, Enzyme, for a "good" (excellent) example. Auntieruth55 ( talk) 16:31, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
This article is really great! It is very in depth and informative. Great job at keeping it strictly factual. There are a few spelling errors and grammatical issues but I have fixed a few. As far as I can see, this is a great article. Although I am not well versed on this subject, your explanations seem to be satisfactory and are broken down into clear, simple explanations. Great Job!
Wexlax20 ( talk) 18:48, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi this is Sara from class! I just wanted to say thank you for reviewing my article (Kaitlin) and for all the comments you left me. I was wondering what sections you think I should condense and what the title of the newly synthesized section should be. Now back to your article... it's great! I thought it was very interesting and very well written. The photos you included were really good and the text boxes provided the information in a clear and easy to understand way. The only thing I think you could touch on is in the acute and late phase response sections. I don't know if this is the case, but if there are symptoms involved with these (such as acute phase = this is when you begin to see hives, etc) that would be helpful to include. The acute phase has so much information it is slightly hard to understand. I have the same issue with my article as well but I think if you can say that is when such and such occurs that will clear it up a bit! All in all, you have a great article and it is clear that you worked very hard on it!
Saralo16 (
talk)
23:32, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Wow, this is a very informational article! I did not know anything about what a protein allergy was, but now I definitely have a better understanding! I think the charts and diagrams are very helpful. You may want to try to move the large chart with the different vitamins out of the footnote section, but I think thte chart is very easy to understand, even to someone who does not know about protein allergies. There are a couple of punctuation errors, with commas particularly, but none that greatly affect how the article is read. Great job girls! This is a great article!
Donovank (
talk)
01:22, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
This article is quite informative. I liked all of your pictures and charts. They helped a lot with understanding the information. One thing I wanted to mention was the fluidity of the pictures and graphs. The graph at the end of the article would be better if it did not flow into the bottom sections on references and what not. I am not sure if it is a picture or not, but if it is what can be done to keep that graph in the section is to make your own graph with wikipedia. I know there is some sort of option available for that because I did it in my article on the freshman fifteen. Check it out if you need to see how it is done. Other than that, great work. Benro129 ( talk) 03:16, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
I also read your article and think you guys have done a great job. I know a bit about proteins and how they work, but certain areas may need some more information so an average reader can follow easier. Your table is great and so are your pictures. Other than a few missing commas I did not see many errors. I was trying to find stuff you could add if you needed to make it longer : I thought maybe how these allergies affect muscle growth and recovery. I was looking at it as an athlete who might have a problem getting enough protein because of allergies.
Keep up the good work. I look forward to seeing the finished article. DukeSoccer11 ( talk) 18:38, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
(By Tyler Ruby)
I didn't want to change around and mess with your article so I thought that I would just post this and you could decide what you wanted to change. I read your article and I thought that it was very good. There is a lot of good information. It seems like you approached it from all angles and covered mostly everything that has to do with protein allergies. After reading it I did find a couple of spelling errors and one or two things that you might want to add. I'll just put the section title below and the spelling errors that I saw or what I thought you could add if you want.
Protein Structure- I thought that maybe you could say where in the cell the protein is made and what actually makes the protein (Ribosomes).
Protein Folding- I saw in the fouth line of the first paragraph it says "need", but I think it should be "needed". Also in the fourth line of the second paragraph you said "In contrast to hydrophilic side chains there are those of the nonpolar category which are considered to be hydrophilic side chains or water hating". I think it should be hydrophobic instead of hydrophilic. Hydrophobic means water hating whereas hydrophilic means water loving. Then in the rest of that paragraph you should change hydrophilic to hydrophobic. In the third paragraph-second line, you have "fold into is desired three-dimensional shape". I think it should be "its" instead of "is"
This is everything that I saw that you might want to consider. Overall though I thought the article was really good and you guys should be really happy with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.190.89.146 ( talk) 02:25, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for all the corrections and help! Clarker1 ( talk) 14:28, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Per the request of User:Clarker1, I'm going to begin a peer-review process. As a bit of a heads up, any changes which have to do with Wikipedia's manual of style will just be made (with proper edit summaries, to ensure users are aware of what the changes are). Edits related to content will also be made, but suggestions about improvements will be given here, on the talk page, so that a consensus may be reached. The first order of business, however, is moving the page; Wikipedia naming conventions state that articles should only have the first letter capitalized (except in cases of proper nouns), and so I'll be moving the page to Protein allergy. Jhfortier ( talk) 20:15, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Thank you so much for your help!! Clarker1 ( talk) 12:44, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your review, it was very helpful. I was hoping to keep the sections about protein function, folding, etc. Would you suggest just linking our article to the allergy article? Or would you insert a paragraph about what the allergy article addresses? hersh016 ( hersh016) —Preceding undated comment added 18:14, 16 April 2010 (UTC).
Although I do not know much about protein or how it works, this article is very informative to readers with in-depth explanations and easy to understand terminology. Some of the most interesting sections for me were about the symptoms, very helpful and much more than the average person would know. I also think the chart of common protein allergies was helpful to illustrate the types of food that cause these allergies and the chart of alternative sources was a great touch!! The work you have done is very good. Keep progressing! Chelcal ( talk) 14:41, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Per my recommendations of the peer review, I've decided to be bold and remove all of the irrelevant sections. I also added a section describing the pathophysiology of allergic response, which was taken from the article Allergy. These sections were great, but were not relevant to this article at all, and needed to be removed.
If this article is going to avoid being merged into the general Allergy article, it needs some strong sections to distinguish the notability of protein allergies particularly. As for the GA nomination, I get the feeling this article will be quick-failed; it's simply not ready yet. Jhfortier ( talk) 20:40, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Unfortunately they are at home. I am not sure that the books would have how a protein reacts in relation to the immune system. I can try to see if there is another text book from one of my friends. I have a few friends in microbiology that may have something in their text about this. Other than that I am not really sure where I would find a viable source. hersh016
jhfortier, we really appreciate all the help! Would you be willing to maybe tell us how we can collaborate both the "new article" you edited and the old article? That way we don't lose the aspects needed for our project and have the improvements from your help! Clarker1 ( talk) 23:12, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
As suggested, we've linked the article to the allergy, protein, and protein folding page. Also, I will add stuff from the food allergy page, also as requested. Would I just cite the information from wikipedia? Is that allowed? Clarker1 ( talk) 00:07, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
The one book we used has a section that contains information that is also in the food article we can use. thanks! Clarker1 ( talk) 00:22, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
If you feel that it is best to remove some information that is fine. We just didn't feel that all of it should be removed, as our professor stated. Thanks for all of your help. So should I take some of the details out of the sections and make it a more general description? hersh016 ( talk) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.190.89.146 ( talk) 03:07, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
thank you Jhfortier!
Clarker1 (
talk)
16:20, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Thank you so much! I was actually going to remove that part this morning, because after I read it more closely I understand where you are coming from. So you think we should leave it now? I am willing to do whatever you feel is best for this article to be the best that it can be. I truly appreciate your help with this project. hersh016 ( talk)
I decided to remove the part on protein control. I do not think that it fits. Jhfortier, thank you so much for your help in trying to edit those sections, but I agree with you that it is best to remove them for the sake of the flow for the rest of the article! hersh016 ( talk)
Ok so I made those last few changes without signing into my account.. I just wanted to be sure that you knew I was on during our class time. hersh016 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:39, 22 April 2010 (UTC).
Annoyingly, Ike9898 just quick-failed this without consulting Jhfortier or the talk page. I have posted an objection on the talk page for Good article noms. Auntieruth55 ( talk) 16:02, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps this article should be removed from the GA queue until it's ready? Sasata ( talk) 19:43, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Ladies, I've asked that the GA nom be withdrawn for a few days, just so you have the time to fix problems that have arisen. I had misunderstood what Jh was doing--not GA, but peer review--and in discussion on the GA nominations talk page, we concluded that perhaps it would be good to pull the nomination for a brief time until you have the chance to make your changes and incorporate the peer review material. Withdrawal will not influence your grade. Auntieruth55 ( talk) 21:18, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
I apologize if this comment is redundant, I haven't read all of the discussion. The lead section needs a lot of work. It needs to encompass the most important points of the whole subject of Protein Allergy, so that if that's the only section a reader looked at, he would know very clearly what the article is about. The lead section should not, in my opinion, explain what a protein is. ike9898 ( talk) 16:21, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Just wondering what everybody would think of the idea of combining all of the background information on proteins (structure, organization, folding) into one Section with a bunch of sub-sections? The content is brief enough, and I think it would make the table of contents a bit less cluttered. Thoughts? Jhfortier ( talk) 04:52, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Aren't there also food allergies that are not protein based? Strawberries? Citrus? Auntieruth55 ( talk) 17:14, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Metabisulfites? the preservatives that are now regulated? They act like allergies, and I think they are a protein interaction (not sure). They block the transfer of oxygen and carbon dioxide, if I remember correctly. Auntieruth55 ( talk) 17:10, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
I've put in a request for another peer review from an editor who specializes in scientific articles. I really think it needs another critical peer review from somebody familiar with scientific articles would be extremely helpful. Jhfortier ( talk) 04:43, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
-- 222.67.206.22 ( talk) 08:17, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
-- 222.67.206.22 ( talk) 08:30, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
-- 222.67.206.22 ( talk) 08:48, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
In the urushiol section, ".0050 milligrams (7.7×10−5 gr)". Those two values are not equivalent. Once you figure out which value is correct, I can format it for you. ike9898 ( talk) 17:58, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 18:08, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Most allergies are due to proteins. Wondering if this should be merged with the allergy or the food allergy article? I do not currently see sufficient justification for it to be separate. We do not have any ICD10 codes etc. like we do in the other article. This topic does not exist on Uptodate, gets no direct pubmed hits, or google scholar hits. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 18:11, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
OUTDENT -- My apologies, I made sense in my head but was terribly inarticulate on paper/wiki. Roughly yes, that's what I mean, and I'm glad we're at least partially in agreement. It seems to me that with a few tweaks, this would be an *excellent* article to go under the heading of Food allergy, especially since the Food allergy article leaves something to be desired on many fronts. Rather than trying to fit all of the good content from Protein allergy to the existing food allergy page, I think we all ought to try moving any good content from Food allergy to Protein allergy, and then move the resulting article to the Food allergy page in its entirety (i.e. replace the Food allergy article). Does that make more sense?
Moving the great information on latex allergies to the main Allergy page (or, heck, to the Latex allergy page, if it isn't already there!) would be another important step, of course. Jhfortier ( talk) 03:45, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
okay, making sure I understand this. Major article on "Allergies" would include brief summaries of "protein allergies" and (as a subset of protein allergies) "food allergies", "latex allergies" and allergies caused by toxins interacting with the Integral membrane proteins (such as poison ivy). To do this, we would move some of the food allergy stuff into the protein allergy stuff, replace the food allergy page with the protein allergy page (but naming it food allergies) and creating a a separate article on latex allergies?
If I have this right, then tell me again what the problem with a separate article on protein allergies is? If not all protein allergies are food allergies, but all food allergies are protein allergies, then protein allergies should be on its own, and food allergies should be a sub article of protein allergies. Latex allergies could also be a sub article of protein allergies. And there should be an article on allergies like urushiol-induced contact dermatitis, and they should all be linked back to the protein allergy article. Auntieruth55 ( talk) 14:01, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
↓
↓
Auntieruth, there already is a separate article on latex allergy so the information from this page would probably fit quite nicely into there (if it isn't already on that page). Regarding the information on urushiol, it is not a protein allergy and does not belong in this discussion (and there already is a decent article on urushiol-induced contact dermatitis). If you'll forgive my anthrpomorphizing, proteins have their sticky little hands involved in nearly every single cellular process, but in this case they are not the source of the allergy. Allergies caused by protein interactions/allergies which involve interaction with cellular proteins are ALL allergies; at some point along the signal cascade which causes the allergic response, at least one protein will be used.
The thing is, when the average user goes looking for information on food allergies, they'll probably type in food allergies. Moving all of this information (including the fantastic work your students did) would make more sense, since it's the logical place to have the information located. And if people are looking for information about non-food allergies, they can always go to the main allergy page. I really can't think of a good reason why we shouldn't be taking all of this information and merging it into places where it would be easier to find, more frequently linked-to. Jhfortier ( talk) 14:21, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
I'll keep a close eye on the movement of content (Doc seems to be doing it now) and will make sure that the good information doesn't get lost in the shuffle. I do wish we could've had some input from your students on this, but GA noms tend to attract a great deal of attention to articles, and can set in motion big changes from other editors. It'll all turn out as a great article in the end, I'm sure.
Merged but not sure what to do with this content:
Proteins have unique properties that allow them to become allergens. Specifically, stabilizing forces in the tertiary and quaternary structure of the proteins resist degradation. Subsequently, they interact improperly with IgE immune cells. [1] Most potentially allergenic proteins cannot survive the destructive environment of the digestive tract; similarly, others that are harmless but have strong structure resist the acidic environment of the digestive system and are sometimes tagged by the immune system as harmful. [2] In other reactions, toxins attach to an existing protein. The immune system considers the protein as harmful to the organism, and rejects the protein, causing a dermatological or systemic response. [3]
A protein is made from a long chain of amino acids, also known as a polypeptide chain, linked via peptide bonds. [4] The higher order structure of a protein depends on the sequence of amino acids which form its primary sequence, as various non-covalent interactions between these amino acids ensure proper protein folding. Proteins have specific amino acid sequences, which all identical proteins share. [5] The twenty different amino acids differ in their side chains, which are relatively large and somewhat polar. These individual amino acids are known as monomers, in the polymer chain known as the protein, which assembles through polymerization. [6]
A protein's secondary structure is created by hydrogen-bond interactions between the amide and carboxyl groups of the amino acid backbone. Secondary structure includes the formation of alpha helices and beta sheets. [4] The tertiary structure is the overall shape of the protein, and is usually driven by the protein's tendency to orient hydrophobic amino acid side chains internally, although hydrogen bonding, ionic interactions and disulfide bonds also help to stabilize proteins in the tertiary state [7] Quaternary structure is the overall combination of polypeptide subunits to form the functional unit. All levels of protein structure are based on the previous level. If there is an error in the primary structure of the protein this will carry to the higher levels. [8]
Protein folding is essential to the overall function of the individual protein. Polypeptide chains are often very long and flexible, which leads to a wide variety of ways for a protein to fold. Non-covalent interactions control the shape and structure of the nascent protein. While a single non-covalent bond is very weak, a combination of many weak bonds provide the needed strength and structure for a given protein. Electrostatic interactions, hydrophobic interactions, hydrogen bonds and van der Waals attractions all aid in protein folding. The specific polar and non-polar side chains of amino acids are also involved the protein's folding and, in turn, its function. [9] The final folded structure of a protein is protein's conformation. [10] A protein's proper amino acid sequence is absolutely required to induce proper folding into the quaternary structure. Two common folding patterns seen in proteins are the alpha helix and beta sheets.
The function of a protein is directly determined by its structure, specifically the aforementioned non-covalent bonds. Proteins interact with other molecules at unique protein binding sites on the ligand. [11] Proteins can have a myriad of functions, including the enzymatic catalysts which facilitate essential reactions in cells. [12] Proteins can also act as a cell signal receptor, essential to initiating cellular responses to chemical signals, or as motor proteins, which are involved with movement of or within individual cells. Another example of protein function is that of structural proteins, which enable cell flexibility and support stability. [12]
The ways in which proteins develop and fold give them their structure; some protein structures allow them to resist degradation in the acidic environment of the digestive tract. Others, which might function as cell signal receptors, can be structurally changed by the attachment of other cells. In both cases, the addition of a cell to a protein, its partial degradation, or its survival of the digestive system causes the immune system to tag the cell as foreign and dangerous. This tagging causes an allergic response. [13]
Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 17:18, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
As a non-cell biologist, I found that information almost more useful than anything else. It was a clear explanation for the amateur about how proteins are created, function and become integral to the allergy process. I do think it needs to go somewhere. Possibly in the allergy article itself, in a section about allergies and proteins. Auntieruth55 ( talk) 17:32, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Protein allergy redirect. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | Protein allergy received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
![]() | This article was the subject of an educational assignment that ended on 2010. Further details are available here. |
A very start! You might take a look at this article, Enzyme, for a "good" (excellent) example. Auntieruth55 ( talk) 16:31, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
This article is really great! It is very in depth and informative. Great job at keeping it strictly factual. There are a few spelling errors and grammatical issues but I have fixed a few. As far as I can see, this is a great article. Although I am not well versed on this subject, your explanations seem to be satisfactory and are broken down into clear, simple explanations. Great Job!
Wexlax20 ( talk) 18:48, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi this is Sara from class! I just wanted to say thank you for reviewing my article (Kaitlin) and for all the comments you left me. I was wondering what sections you think I should condense and what the title of the newly synthesized section should be. Now back to your article... it's great! I thought it was very interesting and very well written. The photos you included were really good and the text boxes provided the information in a clear and easy to understand way. The only thing I think you could touch on is in the acute and late phase response sections. I don't know if this is the case, but if there are symptoms involved with these (such as acute phase = this is when you begin to see hives, etc) that would be helpful to include. The acute phase has so much information it is slightly hard to understand. I have the same issue with my article as well but I think if you can say that is when such and such occurs that will clear it up a bit! All in all, you have a great article and it is clear that you worked very hard on it!
Saralo16 (
talk)
23:32, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Wow, this is a very informational article! I did not know anything about what a protein allergy was, but now I definitely have a better understanding! I think the charts and diagrams are very helpful. You may want to try to move the large chart with the different vitamins out of the footnote section, but I think thte chart is very easy to understand, even to someone who does not know about protein allergies. There are a couple of punctuation errors, with commas particularly, but none that greatly affect how the article is read. Great job girls! This is a great article!
Donovank (
talk)
01:22, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
This article is quite informative. I liked all of your pictures and charts. They helped a lot with understanding the information. One thing I wanted to mention was the fluidity of the pictures and graphs. The graph at the end of the article would be better if it did not flow into the bottom sections on references and what not. I am not sure if it is a picture or not, but if it is what can be done to keep that graph in the section is to make your own graph with wikipedia. I know there is some sort of option available for that because I did it in my article on the freshman fifteen. Check it out if you need to see how it is done. Other than that, great work. Benro129 ( talk) 03:16, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
I also read your article and think you guys have done a great job. I know a bit about proteins and how they work, but certain areas may need some more information so an average reader can follow easier. Your table is great and so are your pictures. Other than a few missing commas I did not see many errors. I was trying to find stuff you could add if you needed to make it longer : I thought maybe how these allergies affect muscle growth and recovery. I was looking at it as an athlete who might have a problem getting enough protein because of allergies.
Keep up the good work. I look forward to seeing the finished article. DukeSoccer11 ( talk) 18:38, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
(By Tyler Ruby)
I didn't want to change around and mess with your article so I thought that I would just post this and you could decide what you wanted to change. I read your article and I thought that it was very good. There is a lot of good information. It seems like you approached it from all angles and covered mostly everything that has to do with protein allergies. After reading it I did find a couple of spelling errors and one or two things that you might want to add. I'll just put the section title below and the spelling errors that I saw or what I thought you could add if you want.
Protein Structure- I thought that maybe you could say where in the cell the protein is made and what actually makes the protein (Ribosomes).
Protein Folding- I saw in the fouth line of the first paragraph it says "need", but I think it should be "needed". Also in the fourth line of the second paragraph you said "In contrast to hydrophilic side chains there are those of the nonpolar category which are considered to be hydrophilic side chains or water hating". I think it should be hydrophobic instead of hydrophilic. Hydrophobic means water hating whereas hydrophilic means water loving. Then in the rest of that paragraph you should change hydrophilic to hydrophobic. In the third paragraph-second line, you have "fold into is desired three-dimensional shape". I think it should be "its" instead of "is"
This is everything that I saw that you might want to consider. Overall though I thought the article was really good and you guys should be really happy with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.190.89.146 ( talk) 02:25, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for all the corrections and help! Clarker1 ( talk) 14:28, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Per the request of User:Clarker1, I'm going to begin a peer-review process. As a bit of a heads up, any changes which have to do with Wikipedia's manual of style will just be made (with proper edit summaries, to ensure users are aware of what the changes are). Edits related to content will also be made, but suggestions about improvements will be given here, on the talk page, so that a consensus may be reached. The first order of business, however, is moving the page; Wikipedia naming conventions state that articles should only have the first letter capitalized (except in cases of proper nouns), and so I'll be moving the page to Protein allergy. Jhfortier ( talk) 20:15, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Thank you so much for your help!! Clarker1 ( talk) 12:44, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your review, it was very helpful. I was hoping to keep the sections about protein function, folding, etc. Would you suggest just linking our article to the allergy article? Or would you insert a paragraph about what the allergy article addresses? hersh016 ( hersh016) —Preceding undated comment added 18:14, 16 April 2010 (UTC).
Although I do not know much about protein or how it works, this article is very informative to readers with in-depth explanations and easy to understand terminology. Some of the most interesting sections for me were about the symptoms, very helpful and much more than the average person would know. I also think the chart of common protein allergies was helpful to illustrate the types of food that cause these allergies and the chart of alternative sources was a great touch!! The work you have done is very good. Keep progressing! Chelcal ( talk) 14:41, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Per my recommendations of the peer review, I've decided to be bold and remove all of the irrelevant sections. I also added a section describing the pathophysiology of allergic response, which was taken from the article Allergy. These sections were great, but were not relevant to this article at all, and needed to be removed.
If this article is going to avoid being merged into the general Allergy article, it needs some strong sections to distinguish the notability of protein allergies particularly. As for the GA nomination, I get the feeling this article will be quick-failed; it's simply not ready yet. Jhfortier ( talk) 20:40, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
Unfortunately they are at home. I am not sure that the books would have how a protein reacts in relation to the immune system. I can try to see if there is another text book from one of my friends. I have a few friends in microbiology that may have something in their text about this. Other than that I am not really sure where I would find a viable source. hersh016
jhfortier, we really appreciate all the help! Would you be willing to maybe tell us how we can collaborate both the "new article" you edited and the old article? That way we don't lose the aspects needed for our project and have the improvements from your help! Clarker1 ( talk) 23:12, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
As suggested, we've linked the article to the allergy, protein, and protein folding page. Also, I will add stuff from the food allergy page, also as requested. Would I just cite the information from wikipedia? Is that allowed? Clarker1 ( talk) 00:07, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
The one book we used has a section that contains information that is also in the food article we can use. thanks! Clarker1 ( talk) 00:22, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
If you feel that it is best to remove some information that is fine. We just didn't feel that all of it should be removed, as our professor stated. Thanks for all of your help. So should I take some of the details out of the sections and make it a more general description? hersh016 ( talk) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.190.89.146 ( talk) 03:07, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
thank you Jhfortier!
Clarker1 (
talk)
16:20, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Thank you so much! I was actually going to remove that part this morning, because after I read it more closely I understand where you are coming from. So you think we should leave it now? I am willing to do whatever you feel is best for this article to be the best that it can be. I truly appreciate your help with this project. hersh016 ( talk)
I decided to remove the part on protein control. I do not think that it fits. Jhfortier, thank you so much for your help in trying to edit those sections, but I agree with you that it is best to remove them for the sake of the flow for the rest of the article! hersh016 ( talk)
Ok so I made those last few changes without signing into my account.. I just wanted to be sure that you knew I was on during our class time. hersh016 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:39, 22 April 2010 (UTC).
Annoyingly, Ike9898 just quick-failed this without consulting Jhfortier or the talk page. I have posted an objection on the talk page for Good article noms. Auntieruth55 ( talk) 16:02, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps this article should be removed from the GA queue until it's ready? Sasata ( talk) 19:43, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
Ladies, I've asked that the GA nom be withdrawn for a few days, just so you have the time to fix problems that have arisen. I had misunderstood what Jh was doing--not GA, but peer review--and in discussion on the GA nominations talk page, we concluded that perhaps it would be good to pull the nomination for a brief time until you have the chance to make your changes and incorporate the peer review material. Withdrawal will not influence your grade. Auntieruth55 ( talk) 21:18, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
I apologize if this comment is redundant, I haven't read all of the discussion. The lead section needs a lot of work. It needs to encompass the most important points of the whole subject of Protein Allergy, so that if that's the only section a reader looked at, he would know very clearly what the article is about. The lead section should not, in my opinion, explain what a protein is. ike9898 ( talk) 16:21, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Just wondering what everybody would think of the idea of combining all of the background information on proteins (structure, organization, folding) into one Section with a bunch of sub-sections? The content is brief enough, and I think it would make the table of contents a bit less cluttered. Thoughts? Jhfortier ( talk) 04:52, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Aren't there also food allergies that are not protein based? Strawberries? Citrus? Auntieruth55 ( talk) 17:14, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Metabisulfites? the preservatives that are now regulated? They act like allergies, and I think they are a protein interaction (not sure). They block the transfer of oxygen and carbon dioxide, if I remember correctly. Auntieruth55 ( talk) 17:10, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
I've put in a request for another peer review from an editor who specializes in scientific articles. I really think it needs another critical peer review from somebody familiar with scientific articles would be extremely helpful. Jhfortier ( talk) 04:43, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
-- 222.67.206.22 ( talk) 08:17, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
-- 222.67.206.22 ( talk) 08:30, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
-- 222.67.206.22 ( talk) 08:48, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
In the urushiol section, ".0050 milligrams (7.7×10−5 gr)". Those two values are not equivalent. Once you figure out which value is correct, I can format it for you. ike9898 ( talk) 17:58, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 18:08, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Most allergies are due to proteins. Wondering if this should be merged with the allergy or the food allergy article? I do not currently see sufficient justification for it to be separate. We do not have any ICD10 codes etc. like we do in the other article. This topic does not exist on Uptodate, gets no direct pubmed hits, or google scholar hits. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 18:11, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
OUTDENT -- My apologies, I made sense in my head but was terribly inarticulate on paper/wiki. Roughly yes, that's what I mean, and I'm glad we're at least partially in agreement. It seems to me that with a few tweaks, this would be an *excellent* article to go under the heading of Food allergy, especially since the Food allergy article leaves something to be desired on many fronts. Rather than trying to fit all of the good content from Protein allergy to the existing food allergy page, I think we all ought to try moving any good content from Food allergy to Protein allergy, and then move the resulting article to the Food allergy page in its entirety (i.e. replace the Food allergy article). Does that make more sense?
Moving the great information on latex allergies to the main Allergy page (or, heck, to the Latex allergy page, if it isn't already there!) would be another important step, of course. Jhfortier ( talk) 03:45, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
okay, making sure I understand this. Major article on "Allergies" would include brief summaries of "protein allergies" and (as a subset of protein allergies) "food allergies", "latex allergies" and allergies caused by toxins interacting with the Integral membrane proteins (such as poison ivy). To do this, we would move some of the food allergy stuff into the protein allergy stuff, replace the food allergy page with the protein allergy page (but naming it food allergies) and creating a a separate article on latex allergies?
If I have this right, then tell me again what the problem with a separate article on protein allergies is? If not all protein allergies are food allergies, but all food allergies are protein allergies, then protein allergies should be on its own, and food allergies should be a sub article of protein allergies. Latex allergies could also be a sub article of protein allergies. And there should be an article on allergies like urushiol-induced contact dermatitis, and they should all be linked back to the protein allergy article. Auntieruth55 ( talk) 14:01, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
↓
↓
Auntieruth, there already is a separate article on latex allergy so the information from this page would probably fit quite nicely into there (if it isn't already on that page). Regarding the information on urushiol, it is not a protein allergy and does not belong in this discussion (and there already is a decent article on urushiol-induced contact dermatitis). If you'll forgive my anthrpomorphizing, proteins have their sticky little hands involved in nearly every single cellular process, but in this case they are not the source of the allergy. Allergies caused by protein interactions/allergies which involve interaction with cellular proteins are ALL allergies; at some point along the signal cascade which causes the allergic response, at least one protein will be used.
The thing is, when the average user goes looking for information on food allergies, they'll probably type in food allergies. Moving all of this information (including the fantastic work your students did) would make more sense, since it's the logical place to have the information located. And if people are looking for information about non-food allergies, they can always go to the main allergy page. I really can't think of a good reason why we shouldn't be taking all of this information and merging it into places where it would be easier to find, more frequently linked-to. Jhfortier ( talk) 14:21, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
I'll keep a close eye on the movement of content (Doc seems to be doing it now) and will make sure that the good information doesn't get lost in the shuffle. I do wish we could've had some input from your students on this, but GA noms tend to attract a great deal of attention to articles, and can set in motion big changes from other editors. It'll all turn out as a great article in the end, I'm sure.
Merged but not sure what to do with this content:
Proteins have unique properties that allow them to become allergens. Specifically, stabilizing forces in the tertiary and quaternary structure of the proteins resist degradation. Subsequently, they interact improperly with IgE immune cells. [1] Most potentially allergenic proteins cannot survive the destructive environment of the digestive tract; similarly, others that are harmless but have strong structure resist the acidic environment of the digestive system and are sometimes tagged by the immune system as harmful. [2] In other reactions, toxins attach to an existing protein. The immune system considers the protein as harmful to the organism, and rejects the protein, causing a dermatological or systemic response. [3]
A protein is made from a long chain of amino acids, also known as a polypeptide chain, linked via peptide bonds. [4] The higher order structure of a protein depends on the sequence of amino acids which form its primary sequence, as various non-covalent interactions between these amino acids ensure proper protein folding. Proteins have specific amino acid sequences, which all identical proteins share. [5] The twenty different amino acids differ in their side chains, which are relatively large and somewhat polar. These individual amino acids are known as monomers, in the polymer chain known as the protein, which assembles through polymerization. [6]
A protein's secondary structure is created by hydrogen-bond interactions between the amide and carboxyl groups of the amino acid backbone. Secondary structure includes the formation of alpha helices and beta sheets. [4] The tertiary structure is the overall shape of the protein, and is usually driven by the protein's tendency to orient hydrophobic amino acid side chains internally, although hydrogen bonding, ionic interactions and disulfide bonds also help to stabilize proteins in the tertiary state [7] Quaternary structure is the overall combination of polypeptide subunits to form the functional unit. All levels of protein structure are based on the previous level. If there is an error in the primary structure of the protein this will carry to the higher levels. [8]
Protein folding is essential to the overall function of the individual protein. Polypeptide chains are often very long and flexible, which leads to a wide variety of ways for a protein to fold. Non-covalent interactions control the shape and structure of the nascent protein. While a single non-covalent bond is very weak, a combination of many weak bonds provide the needed strength and structure for a given protein. Electrostatic interactions, hydrophobic interactions, hydrogen bonds and van der Waals attractions all aid in protein folding. The specific polar and non-polar side chains of amino acids are also involved the protein's folding and, in turn, its function. [9] The final folded structure of a protein is protein's conformation. [10] A protein's proper amino acid sequence is absolutely required to induce proper folding into the quaternary structure. Two common folding patterns seen in proteins are the alpha helix and beta sheets.
The function of a protein is directly determined by its structure, specifically the aforementioned non-covalent bonds. Proteins interact with other molecules at unique protein binding sites on the ligand. [11] Proteins can have a myriad of functions, including the enzymatic catalysts which facilitate essential reactions in cells. [12] Proteins can also act as a cell signal receptor, essential to initiating cellular responses to chemical signals, or as motor proteins, which are involved with movement of or within individual cells. Another example of protein function is that of structural proteins, which enable cell flexibility and support stability. [12]
The ways in which proteins develop and fold give them their structure; some protein structures allow them to resist degradation in the acidic environment of the digestive tract. Others, which might function as cell signal receptors, can be structurally changed by the attachment of other cells. In both cases, the addition of a cell to a protein, its partial degradation, or its survival of the digestive system causes the immune system to tag the cell as foreign and dangerous. This tagging causes an allergic response. [13]
Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 17:18, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
As a non-cell biologist, I found that information almost more useful than anything else. It was a clear explanation for the amateur about how proteins are created, function and become integral to the allergy process. I do think it needs to go somewhere. Possibly in the allergy article itself, in a section about allergies and proteins. Auntieruth55 ( talk) 17:32, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
{{
cite journal}}
: Unknown parameter |month=
ignored (
help)