 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline
Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically
review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Congenital insensitivity to pain.
|
| A summary of this article appears in Pain. |
Just a note-to-self to look this up one day.
- Nagasako EM. Oaklander AL. Dworkin RH. Congenital insensitivity to pain: an update. [Review] [43 refs] [Journal Article. Review. Review, Tutorial] Pain. 101(3):213-9, 2003 Feb.
Reading this paper online shows that some of the thoughts about what i've written are slightly out of date, or at least mix'n'matches between indifference and insensitivity. But it's a work in progress. T 05:27, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Um, sorry about the edit - I'm all over the place U R A GR8 M8 15:24, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Would they still anesthetize you if you had to have surgery?-- Sagittarian Milky Way 23:58, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- Just watched an episode of House MD and noticed that the fictional character with CIP didn't need to be anesthetized while she underwent surgery. Since I'm too lazy to actually look this up, I'm gonna go on the ancient wisdom of the FOX network :P
202.76.151.153 12:54, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- Just watched the same episode, They didnt anesthetize because the nitrous was causing some problem in her system, its my understanding that they usually would to prevent the patient from moving during the procedure-- Beanpolekt 19:59, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Doesn't CIPA refer to anhidrosis? If so, the opening sentence should be "Congenital insensitivity to pain (CIP)..., no?
The section on media depictions, which deals with fictional presentations, doesn't add much understanding of the condition. Media depictions aren't too reliable, and the truth is usually more interesting. WP:MEDMOS discourages "trivia" sections, and that's what this is. I think it should go. Anyone have a reason to keep it in? -- Nbauman ( talk) 10:12, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
The list itself seems useless, but there are ways its contents could be made relevant. If a specific portrayal created controversy or discussion, like some media depictions of albinism have created, that could be relevant(and citeable.) If some specific portrayal was notably accurate or based on a real person, it might be noteworthy. Or if a specific media depiction was very inaccurate, examples from it could be used in the main body of the article to demonstrate myths or misconceptions about the disease by contrasting the depiction with reality(again, citeable.) But, imo, if it's merely supposed to be a list of characters in fiction with this condition, it's something that belongs on TVTropes, not Wikipedia. 97.83.179.39 ( talk) 02:48, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
How can you say they will not flinch or withdraw when exposed to pain if they have congenital insensitivity to pain and so can't feel pain at all? It's damaging threats that they will not pull away from, not pain. Blackbombchu ( talk) 23:11, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
Is the presentation section worth anything. It just seems like advice to parents with children that have CIP. Also what is the point in the incidences section? This article looks like it needs quite a bit of clean up. 76.27.238.105 ( talk) 00:22, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
Is there such a thing as a tendency to never get injured and therefore do all the damage instead? I imagine that somebody would put his/her/their thumb under a stapler and break that stapler and totally bend the staple that would come out or make a hard heavy object hit the ground when that object would get tossed at him/her/them! Cbsteffen ( talk) 04:35, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
|
| This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
| Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline
Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically
review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Congenital insensitivity to pain.
|
| A summary of this article appears in Pain. |
Just a note-to-self to look this up one day.
- Nagasako EM. Oaklander AL. Dworkin RH. Congenital insensitivity to pain: an update. [Review] [43 refs] [Journal Article. Review. Review, Tutorial] Pain. 101(3):213-9, 2003 Feb.
Reading this paper online shows that some of the thoughts about what i've written are slightly out of date, or at least mix'n'matches between indifference and insensitivity. But it's a work in progress. T 05:27, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Um, sorry about the edit - I'm all over the place U R A GR8 M8 15:24, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Would they still anesthetize you if you had to have surgery?-- Sagittarian Milky Way 23:58, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- Just watched an episode of House MD and noticed that the fictional character with CIP didn't need to be anesthetized while she underwent surgery. Since I'm too lazy to actually look this up, I'm gonna go on the ancient wisdom of the FOX network :P
202.76.151.153 12:54, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- Just watched the same episode, They didnt anesthetize because the nitrous was causing some problem in her system, its my understanding that they usually would to prevent the patient from moving during the procedure-- Beanpolekt 19:59, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Doesn't CIPA refer to anhidrosis? If so, the opening sentence should be "Congenital insensitivity to pain (CIP)..., no?
The section on media depictions, which deals with fictional presentations, doesn't add much understanding of the condition. Media depictions aren't too reliable, and the truth is usually more interesting. WP:MEDMOS discourages "trivia" sections, and that's what this is. I think it should go. Anyone have a reason to keep it in? -- Nbauman ( talk) 10:12, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
The list itself seems useless, but there are ways its contents could be made relevant. If a specific portrayal created controversy or discussion, like some media depictions of albinism have created, that could be relevant(and citeable.) If some specific portrayal was notably accurate or based on a real person, it might be noteworthy. Or if a specific media depiction was very inaccurate, examples from it could be used in the main body of the article to demonstrate myths or misconceptions about the disease by contrasting the depiction with reality(again, citeable.) But, imo, if it's merely supposed to be a list of characters in fiction with this condition, it's something that belongs on TVTropes, not Wikipedia. 97.83.179.39 ( talk) 02:48, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
How can you say they will not flinch or withdraw when exposed to pain if they have congenital insensitivity to pain and so can't feel pain at all? It's damaging threats that they will not pull away from, not pain. Blackbombchu ( talk) 23:11, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
Is the presentation section worth anything. It just seems like advice to parents with children that have CIP. Also what is the point in the incidences section? This article looks like it needs quite a bit of clean up. 76.27.238.105 ( talk) 00:22, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
Is there such a thing as a tendency to never get injured and therefore do all the damage instead? I imagine that somebody would put his/her/their thumb under a stapler and break that stapler and totally bend the staple that would come out or make a hard heavy object hit the ground when that object would get tossed at him/her/them! Cbsteffen ( talk) 04:35, 29 July 2022 (UTC)