Content deleted Content added
→Why so much vandalism about testosterone?: re to Testosterone_vs_diabetes |
No edit summary |
||
Line 514:
{{cquote|The statement that all or most scientists or scholars hold a certain view requires reliable sourcing. Without a reliable source that claims a consensus exists, individual opinions should be identified as those of particular, named sources. Editors should avoid original research especially with regard to making blanket statements based on novel syntheses of disparate material. '''The reliable source needs to claim there is a consensus''', rather than the Wikipedia editor. For example, '''even if every scholarly reliable source located states that the sky is blue, it would be improper synthesis to write that there is a scientific consensus that the sky is blue.'''}}.
::I hope it helps. --[[User:Cyclopia|<font color="green">Cycl</font><big>o</big><font color="green">pia</font>]][[User talk:Cyclopia|<font color="red"><sup>talk</sup></font>]] 12:32, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Sorry the artcles that you vandalistically removed speak clearly: cortisol excess (even subclicical) causes diabetes mellitus, testosterone replacement therapy is very effective versus diabetes mellitus type 2. There is full scientific consensus on it. It is excatly what I wrote in the article. The articles are very reliable, if you say no it means you have no good faith.
PS: Here we do not talk about ourselves, it is not important who you are or who I' am, what I do or what you do. We do not care if you study protein folding or glucocorticoid's receptor because it is not a forum.--[[Special:Contributions/158.194.199.13|158.194.199.13]] ([[User talk:158.194.199.13|talk]]) 13:44, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
| |||