Wikipedia - User contributions [en]

User talk:Escape Orbit

2011-07-27T21:13:33Z

Theroofbeam: /* Edit war */ new section

{{User:Escape_Orbit/home}}
{{User:Escape_Orbit/human}}
{{archive box|auto=yes}}

==Edit war==
I do not want to start an edit war. What policy allows you to police the discussion between editors about the development of an article? Feel free to add to the discussion, but please refrain from censoring other people's comments on talk pages. [[User:USchick|USchick]] ([[User talk:USchick|talk]]) 23:19, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
:Reply on [[User talk:USchick|USchick's page]]. Unfortunately discussion on the talk page was not about the article, it was about [[WP:OR|analysing images on the article]]. --[[User:Escape_Orbit|Escape Orbit]] [[User_talk:Escape_Orbit|(Talk)]] 23:37, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

== correcting 'British' grammar ==

I just got a message informing me that I had changed what I had seen as grammar mistakes on the British Def Leppard band page; I was not aware that the Brits like to use plurals when referring to the word "band" when I would consider the "members" as plural, but the "band" as a singular. I will not do that again and certainly will respect the 'difference' in grammar rules. But do I have to go back and reverse the corrections I made in that particular article?

Thanks...

[[User:Blackrabbitgirl|Blackrabbitgirl]] ([[User talk:Blackrabbitgirl|talk]]) 23:38, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

== mentioned on WQA ==

Hi, just wanted to give you a heads up you've been mentioned (by me) at [[Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#User:Alphathon]]. But not in a bad way, I think. [[User:Gerardw|Gerardw]] ([[User talk:Gerardw|talk]]) 21:14, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

== Eric Nicks Page ==

Hi,

I added some more references to Eric Nick's page and made it more objective per your request. I hope the new references provide the validity and notability you were looking for and remove Eric's page from Speedy Deletion.

Thanks for your time,
Azar — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:AzarBogan|AzarBogan]] ([[User talk:AzarBogan|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/AzarBogan|contribs]]) 17:06, 26 May 2011 (UTC) 

:I don't understand. As far as I can recall, I have never looked at the [[Eric Nicks]] article, far less edited it or nominated it for deletion. Nor has the article ever been nominated for deletion, by anyone. --[[User:Escape_Orbit|Escape Orbit]] [[User_talk:Escape_Orbit|(Talk)]] 17:35, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

== references for pictures ==

Hey, shouldnt we leave references for the street art picture Blank? I saw you removed it.

Cheers,

Pedro — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Pedroalmovar|Pedroalmovar]] ([[User talk:Pedroalmovar|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Pedroalmovar|contribs]]) 17:56, 26 May 2011 (UTC) 
:The ref you added didn't go anywhere that confirmed anything about the image added. So there was no point to it. --[[User:Escape_Orbit|Escape Orbit]] [[User_talk:Escape_Orbit|(Talk)]] 21:36, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

== R.H. Campbell ==

Thanks for taking a look at [[R.H. Campbell]] It seems that there is a co-editor of the book with that name but the rest is VERY questionable indeed!!'''[[User:Teapotgeorge|Teapot]]'''[[User:Teapotgeorge|george]][[User talk:Teapotgeorge|Talk]] 22:27, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

[[User:Abbythecat|Abbythecat]] ([[User talk:Abbythecat|talk]]) 22:41, 26 May 2011 (UTC)I wrote the R.H. Campbell page. Teapot, what's your problem with it? I listed a great deal of references but all were deleted. I have put a few back. If you have any questions about this page, please ask me. What information on it do you question? I'll gladly help, as I don't want it deleted. Abbythecat.[[User:Abbythecat|Abbythecat]] ([[User talk:Abbythecat|talk]]) 22:41, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
:Explained how to add cites on [[User talk:Abbythecat|Abbythecat's talk page]]. --[[User:Escape_Orbit|Escape Orbit]] [[User_talk:Escape_Orbit|(Talk)]] 23:03, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

== R.H. Campbell ==

[[User:Abbythecat|Abbythecat]] ([[User talk:Abbythecat|talk]]) 23:03, 26 May 2011 (UTC)I'm Abbythecat, I wrote the page "R.H. Campbell". Please don't delete it. If you have any questions about it, just ask and I'll gladly answer. I have added references and catagories several times but someone keeps deleting them. I'll keep trying, but somebody is intentionally deleting this information. I hope whoever is doing this will stop. Again, I'll help in any way to keep this page. JUST ASK. Thanks. Abbythecat.[[User:Abbythecat|Abbythecat]] ([[User talk:Abbythecat|talk]]) 23:03, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

[[User:Abbythecat|Abbythecat]] ([[User talk:Abbythecat|talk]]) 23:15, 26 May 2011 (UTC)I just now AGAIN added 4 references and 2 categories, so if they are deleted AGAIN, then someone is intentionally hurting my page, which is probably hoaxing, and it should quit. Whoever is doing this should be blocked. Next they will no doubt go after the only other page I wrote, THE RETURN OF BILLY JACK. Whoever is doing this, please leave my pages alone. Thanks. Abbythecat.[[User:Abbythecat|Abbythecat]] ([[User talk:Abbythecat|talk]]) 23:15, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

:Please read what I have put on [[User talk:Abbythecat|your talk page]]. These are not acceptable or proper references. Wikipedia cannot be used as a reference for itself. --[[User:Escape_Orbit|Escape Orbit]] [[User_talk:Escape_Orbit|(Talk)]] 11:44, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

And now [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Richard_H._Campbell,_co-author,_The_Bible_On_Film:_A_Checklist,_1897-1980 it appears that you've had all these discussions at least once before], with the exact same article and exact same problems. There's little point in pleading with people to "JUST ASK" if you don't pay any attention to what has been explained to you repeatedly before. --[[User:Escape_Orbit|Escape Orbit]] [[User_talk:Escape_Orbit|(Talk)]] 15:17, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

== Proposal to delete "R.H. Campbell" and "The Return Of Billy Jack" ==

[[User:Abbythecat|Abbythecat]] ([[User talk:Abbythecat|talk]]) 21:55, 27 May 2011 (UTC)I propose that both articles I wrote be deleted as quickly as possible. Please delete "R.H. Campbell" and "The Return Of Billy Jack". Neither are notable. Neither are written within the correct guidelines. Neither have correct references or categories. Both are worthless. My apologies for even trying. Please delete both as quickly as possible. I won't resubmit either again in any form. In fact, I will never submit anything else. I don't want to be blocked, but if you can "close my account" (as it were) -- meaning just get rid of my "log in" -- please do so. No hard feelings. I'm not angry or sad. I really am sorry for wasting your time. I find it odd these 2 pages were up for almost 4 weeks before anyone complained. I wonder why the delay? Anyway, best -- "so let it be written! so let it be done!" [[User:Abbythecat|Abbythecat]] ([[User talk:Abbythecat|talk]]) 21:55, 27 May 2011 (UTC)abbythecat.[[User:Abbythecat|Abbythecat]] ([[User talk:Abbythecat|talk]]) 21:55, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

== Speedy deletion declined: [[:R.H. Campbell]] ==
Hello Escape Orbit. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of [[:R.H. Campbell]], a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: '''Please provide a link to the previous deletion discussion. Thank you.''' Thank you. — [[User:Malik Shabazz|Malik Shabazz]] [[User talk:Malik Shabazz|Talk]]/[[Special:Contributions/Malik Shabazz|Stalk]] 06:53, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

== Jerusalem Kings ==

First off, thank you for correcting the entry regarding the Jerusalem Kings.

Second, just so you are aware, the edits that were made are in no way an attempt by the C&MA to promote itself. The edits are actually a change that's being done with malicious intent. The edits that the user Tiffone, Getondown and ip 85.65.14.215 made all contain personal information on people on the team and the accusations made can effect safety, family standing in a community, job opportunities and legal standing in the nation of Israel. So, it's not only hard on the people mentioned it's a deliberate attack on the C&MA organization and the people mentioned.

Third, as you've probably seen, the entry has been repeatedly changed. Several of us from the team and friends from across the IFL have been trying to follow the correct procedure in order to get these edits stopped, but it's been a big problem. If there is any advice that you can give us in order to get the entry locked, it would be greatly appreciated. We've even had to correct it once again during the last few days. Generally, the edits are done twice by the same user, then the user changes and edits it twice, and so on.

Thank you for your time, and please feel free to contact me at nonstudying@yahoo.com if you would like. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Gester76|Gester76]] ([[User talk:Gester76|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Gester76|contribs]]) 19:41, 28 May 2011 (UTC) 

== Re ==

I started an ANI thread, which I removed; if you like you can restart it. I wouldn't be against it. I think we have a [[WP:COMPETENCE|competence]] problem here. [[User:The Blade of the Northern Lights|The Blade of the Northern Lights]] ([[User talk:The Blade of the Northern Lights|話して下さい]]) 01:37, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
:Update; [[User:Kudpung]] seems to have a handle on the situation here. [[User:The Blade of the Northern Lights|The Blade of the Northern Lights]] ([[User talk:The Blade of the Northern Lights|話して下さい]]) 17:02, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

== I know what I like ... ==

How is it of no reference to "anything" ? I was stating facts. The song can be heard "In popular culture" on the 2010 Top Gear Christmas special. I believe your edit of my edit to be utterly unfair and quite frankly very insulting. As you were. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Jordan.benn|Jordan.benn]] ([[User talk:Jordan.benn|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Jordan.benn|contribs]]) 11:05, 29 May 2011 (UTC) 
:I'm sorry if you found my edit summary "insulting", that's the danger of 1 line summaries, they tend to sound abrupt. The question would be how is this significant to the song or to people who wish to know about the song? Not very, I think. The song can be heard "In popular culture" in countless places, it '''is''' popular culture. So listing it under "In popular culture" is no excuse for trivia of no notability. And it wasn't cited either. --[[User:Escape_Orbit|Escape Orbit]] [[User_talk:Escape_Orbit|(Talk)]] 17:17, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough, I shall cite and reference it properly if you wish. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Jordan.benn|Jordan.benn]] ([[User talk:Jordan.benn|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Jordan.benn|contribs]]) 01:44, 30 May 2011 (UTC) 

== ref: Dharma Records ==

Hi there
I'd like to take you up on your implied suggestion that an independent label founder and his/her provenance is not relevant. It is quite common on wiki to include this as a way of suggesting the ethos and provenance (again) of an indie label. Random examples include XL Recordings, Instant Karma record label, B-Unique Records, Bella Union, Beggars Banquet Records, and many others. In fact I would suggest that it is quite important.
Regards
[[User:Riverman48|Riverman48]] ([[User talk:Riverman48|talk]]) 00:28, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
:You may be right, but the problem with this article was it spent more time in the lead discussing the label's founder than the label itself. It was also confusingly phrased, I couldn't follow what parts were record labels, which parts were bands and which parts were recordings.
:Could you also clarify whether you have a [[WP:COI|conflict of interest]] in this? What I have gathered from your edits is that you are the label founder. Creating articles about yourself in Wikipedia is strongly discouraged. --[[User:Escape_Orbit|Escape Orbit]] [[User_talk:Escape_Orbit|(Talk)]] 07:45, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

==[[Criticism of government response to Hurricane Katrina]]==
I did leave a link to support the fact that two letters had been written. It was deleted. Your complaint is spurious and slanted.
The link is here:
http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=kat_71 — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Sam Donald|Sam Donald]] ([[User talk:Sam Donald|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Sam Donald|contribs]]) 17:52, 2 June 2011 (UTC) 
:This is a link to a user generated wiki, which doesn't support what you're saying anyway. --[[User:Escape_Orbit|Escape Orbit]] [[User_talk:Escape_Orbit|(Talk)]] 20:33, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

== Vandal clean up on [[Paul Revere]] page ==

Thanks. I found this lovely falafel on another major contributer's page and thought you deserved one as well!
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#330000; background-color:#CCFF99; border-width:8px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">[[Image:Falafel_award.png|130px|left]]

[[User:Amadscientist|Amadscientist]] ([[User talk:Amadscientist|talk]]) has given you a [[falafel]] sandwich! Falafel sandwiches are a specialty of the [[Middle East]]. With a little [[tahini]] and maybe a spicy sauce, they are delicious and promote [[Wikipedia:WikiLove|WikiLove]]. Hopefully, this one has added flavor to your day.

Spread the goodness of falafel by adding {{tls|Falafel}} to someone's Talk page with a friendly message! Give a falafel sandwich to someone you've had disagreements with in the past, or to a good friend.
</div>--[[User:Amadscientist|Amadscientist]] ([[User talk:Amadscientist|talk]]) 00:27, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

:Mmmm, I love Falafel. Thanks! --[[User:Escape_Orbit|Escape Orbit]] [[User_talk:Escape_Orbit|(Talk)]] 13:30, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

== Album capitalization ==

That's all nice for generalities, but don't you think the way the artist writes it on the album should have something to do with it, too? Or that what we do match the way it appears in every other source? On Hounds of Love "Running Up That Hill" is either spelt with all words capitalized, or with "up" and "that" uncapitalized. On my video, it's spelt with all caps. Make a decision, but make it consistent. If you revert all the "thats" you should go in and change all the "Ups" to "ups" too.--[[User talk:TEHodson|TEHodson]] 22:57, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
:Answer on [[User talk:TEHodson|TEHodson's page]] --[[User:Escape_Orbit|Escape Orbit]] [[User_talk:Escape_Orbit|(Talk)]] 23:08, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
::What's weird is that someone else just came along and changed all the "That's" to lower case. They've always been upper case, for years. I don't understand why they got changed in the first place. This is one of the many fiddly things that drives me crazy about this place and makes me take LLLLOOONNNNGGGG breaks from editing here. I think it not only should be standardized in a sane way (virtually everyone capitalizes all words in song titles), or should reflect the way the artist does it, but it looks ridiculous right now: Running Up that Hill, and it now matches NONE of the ways in which the song title is listed anywhere else. But really, I don't care what you do. It's hardly a life or death problem. --[[User talk:TEHodson|TEHodson]] 23:17, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

== Suggested Intro To Schrödinger's Cat ==

Please comment on my suggested introduction on the talk page [[User:A2326xyz|A2326xyz]] ([[User talk:A2326xyz|talk]]) 12:44, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

== Speculation about Mona Lisa ‎ ==

That user is on his third account, as you can see from the talk page on the article. He's been attempting to insert his OR into the article for months now, after having given up on doing so in the main [[Mona Lisa]] page. Not sure if WP has an "automatic ban" policy or the like, but as soon as this guy creates another account he'll be right back doing the same annoying editing of the page.--[[User:Chimino|Chimino]] ([[User talk:Chimino|talk]]) 20:50, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

== Thank you ==

thanks for detecting and clearing vandalism. Is it possible to find any information about the user who is writing the vandal statements? - can we get the ipaddress or any other identification? — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Cantm|Cantm]] ([[User talk:Cantm|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Cantm|contribs]]) 20:48, 13 June 2011 (UTC) 

== Re. [[Maharaja Lawak]] ==

Foiled by the translator... Chrome thought the page was in Swahili and the translation made it seem like it was about a comedian and there was no corresponding article in the Swahili WP. Now I see it's Malay. XXX '''[[User:antiuser|antiuser]]''' [[User_talk:antiuser|eh?]] 21:35, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
:Well your guess was as good as my first one! :) --[[User:Escape_Orbit|Escape Orbit]] [[User_talk:Escape_Orbit|(Talk)]] 21:37, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

== [[Kit house]] ==

Hey friend, I know ordinary social blogs are not appropriate for external links - but the one you removed is written by a "recognized authority" on this subject, who has published several books about Sears and other kit homes. So I'm restoring the link, per criteria at [[WP:ELNO]], number 11. [[User:Textorus|Textorus]] ([[User talk:Textorus|talk]]) 23:38, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
==Talkback==
{{talkback|Ebikeguy|Grammar|ts=15:59, 1 July 2011 (UTC)}}
[[User:Ebikeguy|Ebikeguy]] ([[User talk:Ebikeguy|talk]]) 15:59, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

== Paleontological Inaccuracies section ==

I think that you shouldn't delete the Paleontological Inaccuracies section because it pointed the endless mistakes made by the creators of the Walking with Series, even though they might have done their best.

However, if you still think that there is no problem in deleting the section, that is OK. If you think that you should put the section back, that is also OK.

I would suggest, if you decide to put the section back, to make sure that the Walking with Dinosaurs actually depicted 'this'. Delete the 'fact' if you see that the Walking with Dinosaurs did not depict 'this'. Also delete the 'facts' that aren't true. Remember that it is definitely OK to think that there is no problem in deleting the section. Thank you for reading.

P.S. This is just a suggestion and also, I like your user page, it is awesome!!! [[User:Timelinearth|Timelinearth]] ([[User talk:Timelinearth|talk]]) 16:05, 2 July 2011 (UTC)Timelinearth

Please write a message back. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Timelinearth|Timelinearth]] ([[User talk:Timelinearth|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Timelinearth|contribs]]) 16:08, 2 July 2011 (UTC) 

== Xavier Brieze ==

I recently joined wiki to assist in the child support information situation in the US. I went to relevant pages and offered a link to a website that will truly help others with this situation. I am not a spammer. Why was I called a spammer? [[User:XavierBrieze|XavierBrieze]] ([[User talk:XavierBrieze|talk]]) 21:08, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
:No one called you a spammer. But you were adding links to Wikipedia that go to your own website. If you would like to assist in providing child support information, then please improve the content '''on''' Wikipedia, not simply lead readers to your website. [[WP:NOT#DIRECTORY|Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia, not a directory of weblinks]]. Thanks. --[[User:Escape_Orbit|Escape Orbit]] [[User_talk:Escape_Orbit|(Talk)]] 21:19, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

== [[Mr. Monk and the Leper]] ==

I was under the impression that the plot shouldn't be that long on Wikipedia.

On the other hand, I like all that trivia and come to Wikipedia to see it and I hate that Wikipedia regards trivia in such a negative way if policies are actually followed. Sure, I can go back in the histories of the articles, but this is information I enjoy reading. I suppose [[WP:OR|lack of sources]] is a problem, but if the information were properly sourced, would that help?[[User:Vchimpanzee|Vchimpanzee]] '''·''' [[User talk:Vchimpanzee| talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/Vchimpanzee|contributions]] '''·''' 21:25, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
*'''Supported'''. I also like adding trivia and goof information, like the stuff that you removed from the "[[Mr. Monk's 100th Case]]" page. Some of that background information has been around for a long time and can be very important. For the record, I'm in support with Vchimpanzee here. [[User:DReifGalaxyM31|DReifGalaxyM31]] ([[User talk:DReifGalaxyM31|talk]]) 18:01, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
**I just also wanted to add further on, some of the information you removed from that page in question was information that had been there for years and was generally accepted. For the record, if it's been there a long time, "don't... change anything." [[User:DReifGalaxyM31|DReifGalaxyM31]] ([[User talk:DReifGalaxyM31|talk]]) 18:05, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
:::I found that part about Randy and the wall interesting. There the hole in the wall was, and there it wasn't. I'm not observant like Monk, though I am neurotic like he is, but I did see that. By the way, I'm seeing the episodes for the first time as I didn't want to pay for cable.[[User:Vchimpanzee|Vchimpanzee]] '''·''' [[User talk:Vchimpanzee| talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/Vchimpanzee|contributions]] '''·''' 20:15, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
::I don't doubt you find it interesting, but I don't think [[WP:JUSTDONTLIKEIT|"I like it"]] trumps [[WP:OR|"no original research"]]. And we are agreed this is original research, something that is a against core Wikipedia policy? Naturally there is an element of personal opinion that comes with defining trivia and fancruft, but original research is fairly easy to define. --[[User:Escape_Orbit|Escape Orbit]] [[User_talk:Escape_Orbit|(Talk)]] 21:14, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
:::It would be nice if we could find such information on a site like Wikipedia which had some permanence to it, and some kind of "official" status. I started to say reliable, but then once people start adding this sort of thing the site ceases to be reliable. I trust comments like these, though.[[User:Vchimpanzee|Vchimpanzee]] '''·''' [[User talk:Vchimpanzee| talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/Vchimpanzee|contributions]] '''·''' 18:43, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
::::That's exactly how ''not'' to use Wikipedia. It's not "official" because it's on Wikipedia. It's "official" because it's sourced to a [[WP:RS|reliable source]], and this trivia isn't. If you'd like to record Monk trivia that you've worked out, then the place to do it on a fansite. Not Wikipedia. --[[User:Escape_Orbit|Escape Orbit]] [[User_talk:Escape_Orbit|(Talk)]] 20:02, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
{{outdent}}Actually, I just want to read it. I don't want to have to go to a bunch of sites to do it.[[User:Vchimpanzee|Vchimpanzee]] '''·''' [[User talk:Vchimpanzee| talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/Vchimpanzee|contributions]] '''·''' 20:12, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
:Yeah, that's what Wikipedia does, it's an [[encyclopedia]]. And if you want to check, you can go to "a bunch of sites". My point is that this is [[WP:OR|original research]] That means it isn't anywhere ''but'' Wikipedia and the reader has no idea if it's correct or not and no way of checking. They only have the word of an anonymous editor who could be wrong, mistaken, mislead or even malicious. That's why [[WP:OR|Wikipedia doesn't do original research]] and isn't [[WP:FAN|a fansite]]. --[[User:Escape_Orbit|Escape Orbit]] [[User_talk:Escape_Orbit|(Talk)]] 20:25, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
::Well, that part of it I can accept.[[User:Vchimpanzee|Vchimpanzee]] '''·''' [[User talk:Vchimpanzee| talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/Vchimpanzee|contributions]] '''·''' 20:36, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
::Still, that part about Randy's hole in the wall sounds believable. It must have come from somewhere. Our problem is finding where.[[User:Vchimpanzee|Vchimpanzee]] '''·''' [[User talk:Vchimpanzee| talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/Vchimpanzee|contributions]] '''·''' 20:39, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
:::Oh there's no problem with most of it. It's almost all believable, and probably even all accurate as well. But that's not the problem with it. Criteria for inclusion into Wikipedia isn't "well, it sounds like it's probably true". [[WP:V|It's verifiability]]. So it would be great if you could find a source. And please remember, fan sites and forums are generally not [[WP:RS|reliable sources]], as they're equally just some fan's take on things which has all the same problems. --[[User:Escape_Orbit|Escape Orbit]] [[User_talk:Escape_Orbit|(Talk)]] 20:46, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

== [[Talk:Eatyourkimchi]] ==

Could you please reply on [[Talk:Eatyourkimchi]]. Thanks, [[User:Cloveapple|Cloveapple]] ([[User talk:Cloveapple|talk]]) 19:57, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

== Kylie Jenner ==

I see that you are becoming as frustrated with changes at [[Kylie Jenner]] as I have become, and as another long-term patroller was before me. Can I float an idea past you regarding her height? She is 13/14 y.o. and will be growing rapidly, so the height issue would be awkward even if it were reliably sourced.

I have been unable to locate a modeling agency that contains the info and that would seem to me to be the best option. In the absence of that, and bearing in mind her age/growth situation, would it not be more sensible for us simply to remove that parameter entirely? I have absolutely no interest at all in any of this family but the amount of petty changes, insertion of copyvios etc that go on across their articles is incredible. - [[User:Sitush|Sitush]] ([[User talk:Sitush|talk]]) 11:55, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

== Could you take another look? ==

I really appreciated your earlier explanation about peacock terms. Could you give [[Eatyourkimchi]] another quick look and see what new attrocities I've committed? ;-) I know I've probably done a lot of beginner's mistakes. [[User:Cloveapple|Cloveapple]] ([[User talk:Cloveapple|talk]]) 07:06, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

== Edit war ==

I posted my reasoning for deleting the classification alternative medicine from osteopathy on the discussion page. What did not get posted was the reason for reinstating it.

User talk:Ryan Paddy

2011-07-27T21:09:13Z

Theroofbeam: /* Osteopathy */

{{archive box|auto=yes}}
If you leave a message here, I'll respond here.

== RfAR ==
You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#POV tag at Israel and the apartheid analogy]] and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
* [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Requesting Arbitration]];
* [[Wikipedia:Arbitration guide]].

Thanks, – [[user:Fuzzy|Fuzzy]] – 21:49, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

==Request for MEDCAB Mediation==

The request for mediation concerning Israel and the apartheid analogy, to which you were are a party, has been accepted. Please watchlist the case page (which is where the mediation will take place). If you have any questions, please contact me.

[[User:Ronk01|Ronk01]] ([[User talk:Ronk01|talk]]) 03:06, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

:I posted a reply to your question about racial segregation vs racial discrimination and genocide. I also added a note about the ARBCOM remedy on compulsory mediation under "How do you think we can help?". [[User:Harlan wilkerson|harlan]] ([[User talk:Harlan wilkerson|talk]]) 13:25, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

== You are now a Reviewer ==

[[File:Wikipedia Reviewer.svg|right|130px]]
Hello. Your account has been granted the "<tt>reviewer<tt>" userright, allowing you to [[WP:Reviewing|review other users' edits]] on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a [[WP:Pending changes|two-month trial]] scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not [[wp:autoconfirmed|autoconfirmed]] to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only [[Special:StablePages|a small number of articles]], similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at [[Special:OldReviewedPages]].

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious [[WP:VAND|vandalism]] or [[WP:BLP|BLP violations]], and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see [[Wikipedia:Reviewing process]]). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found [[WP:Pending changes|here]].

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.  [[User:Courcelles|Courcelles]] ([[User talk:Courcelles|talk]]) 18:39, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

==Mediation: Israel and the Apartheid analogy==

Just an FYI, we are running a straw poll on title choices on the mediation page - see [[Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2010-04-14/Israel_and_the_apartheid_analogy#Straw_poll_on_titles]]. If you pitch in a vote or three, we can move this along. {{=)}} --[[User_talk:Ludwigs2|Ludwigs2]] 06:01, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

== Rollback ==

I am pleased to be able to tell you that I have granted you rollback rights. I have reviewed your editing history and am confident you will make good use of this tool. [[User:JamesBWatson|JamesBWatson]] ([[User talk:JamesBWatson|talk]]) 09:38, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

== Kolarov ==

Hi, could you please explain why you accepted [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Aleksandar_Kolarov&diff=375190461&oldid=375190274 this edit} [[User:Off2riorob|Off2riorob]] ([[User talk:Off2riorob|talk]]) 10:12, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
:Sure. My understanding of the [[Wikipedia:Reviewing|reviewing process]] is that reviewers are only supposed to reject pending changes that are obvious vandalism, BLP violations, etc. I couldn't detect that this edit was either - although perhaps if I knew more about football it might have looked like vandalism, I dunno. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 10:18, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

You should not accept things just because they are not obvious vandalism, as a reviewer you should review the desired addition as you would any edit, it was not cited was it so you revert it as uncited. You basically accepted a untrue addition to the article, please in future if you do not know if it is a correct edit do not accept it. If you accept something, go back and have a look at what you have accepted if it is cited then fine if not remove it, reviewing is not, it does not look like vandalism so I accept it, it is having a good look at it and if you support it and it is cited then accept it, you are responsible for all edits you accept. If you do not understand something then leave it for someone else to look at. Thanks. [[User:Off2riorob|Off2riorob]] ([[User talk:Off2riorob|talk]]) 10:23, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Please let me know if you need any more detailed assistance with reviewing. [[User:Off2riorob|Off2riorob]] ([[User talk:Off2riorob|talk]]) 10:25, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

:What you're saying sound sensible, but it's not what the [[Wikipedia:Reviewing|guideline on reviewing]] says. It says "You should not accept the new revision if in analyzing the diff you find [BLP violation, vandalism, etc]. ... If you find no reason not to accept the new revision, then accept it from the reviewing screen; accepting doesn't prevent you from later editing the article to address concerns you may still have." Now, following the letter of that guideline means that I ''should'' have accepted the edit because it wasn't vandalism or BLP violation. However, if I thought it was a bad edit for other reasons then after I accepted it I should then have undone it. I'd be interested to hear where your differing interpretation comes from given that pending changes is a trial process and I'm sure people are seeing it in various lights. In this instance, I would have undone the edit after accepting it had I noticed that the Manchester City connection is controversial. However, my understanding of the pending change review process (as currently written) is that it's only expected of the reviewer to accept or undo the change based on vandalism/BLP/copyright, and that going on to undo an accepted edit for other reasons is desirable but not required. That's what's implied in the wording "accepting doesn't prevent you from later editing the article to address concerns". Personally, I think this "accept and undo" process is somewhat byzantine and will hopefully be streamlined as part of the trial, but I'm doing my best to follow the guideline as actually written (not how I think it should be) to help make the trial meaningful. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 12:05, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
::That is what I have seen discussed, you are reviewing articles you know nothing about and you are accepting anything that is not vandalism..for example..John plays for Man city..and changes it the Liverpool..not really vandalism is it just false addition, so you accept it and move on.. what is good about that? the article now says he plays for another team, do you think you have done a correct thing? Do you think the wiipedia would be more correct after or before your ''reviewing'' ? [[User:Off2riorob|Off2riorob]] ([[User talk:Off2riorob|talk]]) 19:46, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
:::Let's continue this discussion at [[Wikipedia:Pending_changes/Feedback]]. As I said, I'm following the instructions for reviewing. Whether they are good instructions or not is certainly an open question but I think it's one better asked of the whole community, not as a conversation between the two of us. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 19:56, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

==Discussion on closure of Israel and Aparthied mediation==
Current consensus seems to be to move the article to '''Israel and Apartheid''' with an appropriate disambiguation line to prevent any misinterpretations. Please weigh in over the next few days. --[[User_talk:Ludwigs2|Ludwigs2]] 17:11, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
:Ryan or Ludwig: I'm wondering if it would be wise to ask a second mediator from the Mediation Cabal to join this mediation, specifically to facilitate the closure (one way or another). Ludwig: I notice you've been off WP for a couple of days. Having a relaxing beach vacation, I hope. But if you are not going to be around in the next few days, maybe we should ask a Mediation Cabal person (there are three "points of contact" listed at the top of the Cabal page) if they would mind stepping in to facilitate the closure. Even if Ludwig is around, a second opinion is always a good thing. .. kind of like an uninvolved admin coming around in an AfD. Or, Ludwig, you could just do the closure yourself, either way is fine with me. Ryan, what do you think? --[[User:Noleander|Noleander]] ([[User talk:Noleander|talk]]) 20:36, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
::Ludwigs2 will presumably be back some time soon (he probably would have let everyone know about an extended absence), and it can be sorted out then. If not, then your idea might be a way forward. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 21:28, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

== RFC re Inclusion criteria for Lists ==

Note there is a discussion at [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Inclusion criteria for Lists]] that you may wish to comment on. --[[User:Gavin.collins|Gavin Collins]] ([[User talk:Gavin.collins#top|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Gavin.collins|contribs)]] 12:57, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

== RfC Mention ==
I have mentioned you at an RfC [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/BlueRobe] regarding [[User:BlueRobe|BlueRobe]]'s behavior. Just FYI. --[[User:Torchwoodwho|Torchwood Who?]] ([[User talk:Torchwoodwho|talk]]) 14:12, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

== Thanks for the effort ==

{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | {{#if: {{ifequal|{{{2}}}|alt}}|[[File:Barnstar of Diligence Hires.png|100px]]|[[Image:Barnstar_of_Diligence.png|100px]]}}

|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Barnstar of Diligence'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | Your efforts to improve Wikipedia - promoting accuracy and neutrality - are appreciated. [[User:Noleander|Noleander]] ([[User talk:Noleander|talk]]) 23:57, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
|}

==Revert==
What's up with [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:IPad&diff=prev&oldid=387394829 this]?--[[User:Terrillja|Terrillja]][[User Talk:Terrillja| talk]] 21:05, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
:Sorry! Looks like I must have mis-clicked while browsing too quickly through my watchlist. I didn't even read that post, or notice I had reverted it. Humble apologies. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 00:09, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

== Invitation to contribute your opinion to a stalemated edit conflict ==

Since you have been an active editor on the Talk Page of the "Israel and the Apartheid Analogy" article, I would like to invite you to contribute your opinion regarding the current stalemated discussion under the "'Reverted Contribution' continued" section. I sought a "Third Opinion" on this, but the Third Opinion editor indicated that on pages like this where there is a lot of editor discussion, the views of other editors should be solicited. To clarify just what the current stalemate is about, you can read from Para. 1.1 on in the "'Reverted Contribution' continued" section, that is, from where a Third Opinion was requested. Thank you very much for your participation.[[User:Tempered|Tempered]] ([[User talk:Tempered|talk]]) 03:07, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

== Israel and the apartheid analogy ==

You said - Introductory sentences should be concise, they shouldn't enumerate the critics, detail comes later. Also removed excessive linking, there is no need to link obvious terms like "critic" or "policy"

However what you removed is - The [State of Israel]'s treatment of the [Palestinians] has been compared by two [[United Nations Special Rapporteur]s, two [human rights group]s and [criticism of Israel|critics] of [Israeli-occupied territories|Israeli policy] to South Africa's

The reason I added the number of Rapporteurs is because there have only ever been two. On the other hand while there are a large number of human rights groups, the article's references to them is limited to two Israeli groups, and volume of criticism is relevant due to the subject of the article.

Note that the wikilinks you removed are not to general articles such as 'critic' or 'policy' as you suggested. Also, you restored the investigative descriptor of the role of the special repporteur, but United Nations does not include investigative function as such in the role descriptor in the sense it is used in other roles that do investigative work, such as law enforcement roles.

Please discuss any reverts of anything I edit with me prior to taking action. Please have a good day [[User:Koakhtzvigad|Koakhtzvigad]] ([[User talk:Koakhtzvigad|talk]]) 23:47, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

:I stand by my edits and am happy to discuss them on the article talk page, which is the approproate venue. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 01:30, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

::Please do in that case [[User:Koakhtzvigad|Koakhtzvigad]] ([[User talk:Koakhtzvigad|talk]]) 01:31, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

== Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot ==

[[User:SuggestBot|SuggestBot]] predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
{|cellspacing=10 style="background-color:transparent;"
|-
|valign=top|
;Stubs:
:[[David Jennings (bishop)]]
:[[DragonRaid]]
:[[Mu Arae e]]
:[[New Zealand Live Action Role Playing Society]]
:[[John Rice (UK Councillor)]]
:[[Planet's Edge]]
:[[Role-playing game system]]
:[[Plot point (role-playing games)]]
:[[Slough and Eton Church of England Business and Enterprise College]]
:[[Primetime Adventures]]
:[[Caverswall Road railway station]]
:[[Digital Signal 3]]
:[[Mike Pohjola]]
:[[K-type main sequence star]]
:[[Pantheon (role-playing game)]]
:[[Emblem of Afghanistan]]
:[[EverQuest Role-Playing Game]]
:[[Richard Dansky]]
:[[Sony Aath]]
|align=top|
;Cleanup
:[[Role-playing game theory]]
:[[Dungeon (video game)]]
:[[List of campaign settings]]
;Merge
:[[Online text-based role-playing game]]
:[[Azure Dreams (Game Boy Color)]]
:[[Ecliptic pole]]
;Add Sources
:[[Curious Pastimes]]
:[[List of role-playing games by name]]
:[[Role-playing game terms]]
;Wikify
:[[Loren Wiseman]]
:[[English Defence League]]
:[[Reflexive antagonism]]
;Expand
:[[Hydroelectric power in New Zealand]]
:[[WWE Money in the Bank]]
:[[Confederate States of America]]
|}

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have '''feedback''' on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on [[User_talk:SuggestBot|SuggestBot's talk page]]. Thanks from {{User0|Nettrom}}, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on [[User:SuggestBot/Requests|the SuggestBot request page]]. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- [[User:SuggestBot|SuggestBot]] ([[User talk:SuggestBot|talk]]) 15:16, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

==Let me take your temperature==
I just thought I should make this clear. My question about parapsychologists their delusions and fantasies is not meant to be malicious. It is like touching my grand daugher's forehead, and feeling warmth. Then asking "Do you have a fever? Let's take your temperature." I have genuine curiosity. I would just like to know. [[User:Kazuba|Kazuba]] ([[User talk:Kazuba|talk]]) 02:41, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
:I'm not concerned about maliciousness, just about keeping talk page discussion on the topic of practical suggestions for improvements to the article. That usually involves the provision of quotes from reliable sources, or summaries of the positions presented by reliable sources. Everything else is [[WP:OR|original research]] or just chatter around the topic, which isn't appropriate on talk pages. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 19:52, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
==A little trouble==
Recently I intended to add some material to the wikipedia that came from limited editions and a small, no longer in existence publisher. In this case "The Psychic Press." I was told I could not use material from a book published by the Psychic Press even if the same material was basically repeated in a book from a more established publisher. In fact I got the impression from this critic that nothing published by the [[Society for Psychical Research]] had any validity or a right to be on the wikipedia. Is this the way it is now? Or had I encountered an [[extremist]]? Please reply soon. [[User:Kazuba|Kazuba]] ([[User talk:Kazuba|talk]]) 03:58, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

:It depends on the context and what you're trying to use the source for. If the context is an article about parapsychology, then statements published in a parapsychology journal/book may be considered significant and worth including, even though in a more general article (e.g. one on psychology) this source may not be considered a [[WP:RS|reliable source]]. Generally speaking, it's easier to get a source such as this included as an attributed source of a statement of the opinion of the author, rather than as an unattributed source of undisputed "fact". [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 19:19, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
I don't exactly understand what you are saying. But thanks for the immediate reply. That data was the opinion of one of [[Leonora Piper]]'s many clients. Briefly the client claimed he felt that he had been manipulated by Leonora Piper and Mrs. Piper was a fraud. This seems to have been rarely recorded from the Piper readings. [[User:Kazuba|Kazuba]] ([[User talk:Kazuba|talk]]) 20:52, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

:Are you talking about [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Leonora_Piper&action=historysubmit&diff=403315299&oldid=400086145 this edit] of yours? The problem here may not just be the book you're referencing, but what you're writing about it. You can't write opinions into an article that you formed by reading a source, that's considered [[WP:OR|original research]]. You have to just write what the source itself said, straight up, without interpretation. Basically, you either summarise a source, or you quote a source, but you don't write the conclusions that you personally drew from reading a source. I haven't read the source in question so can't say whether your writing is original research, but I would say the the tone of your contribution sounds rather like original research, not like you're summarising the source. That edit was reverted by another editor because they thought it was original research, according to their comment, not so much because of an issue with the reliability of the source. They did note it was a [[WP:PRIMARY|primary source]], but that doesn't necessarily make it unusable. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 04:18, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Wow! Thanks for taking an interest in this problem. I did NOT surmise. I did NOT give my opinion. This was quoted (I can do that?) from the author A.T. Baird. I am interested in what people of the past have to say. I try to stay out of it out as a respect to the deceased. I'm pretty good at that. That is what critical historians do. Thanks again for taking an interest. I feel so lost on the wikipedia. In real life outside of the wikipedia I did historical research and editing for Paul Kurtz. He betrayed me. Martin Gardner understood and was the only one who talked to me and became my tutor. He said I taught him a lot. Randi has always given me the cold shoulder. So far other magicians never respond. I cannot read their silence. But I suspect I make others feel uncomfortable. It is breaking my heart. Did you read my user page? Did you look at the link after the statement "this came as quite a surprise" ? What am I supposed to do with all this knowledge I have collected? It delights me. Just keep my mouth shut? My wife always told me to stay away from the wikipedia. Others would just hurt me. There is a photograph here somewhere on the web of James Randi and Martin Gardner. Martin is holding and has opened Alice's Adventures in Wonderland pop-up book created by Robert Sabuda. I delighted him with that book. Once he delighted me by doing a magic effect with me over the telephone. I cannot remember if he explained it to me or not. I changed it a little bit and came up with my own presentation and I drove my therapist (female of course) crazy with that little gem. I always thought of Martin as a puzzler, magician and friend, not a skeptic. [[User:Kazuba|Kazuba]] ([[User talk:Kazuba|talk]]) 21:09, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

:If you'd like I can give some advice on how to contribute to Wikipedia. We can start with the edit I linked to above, here's the content of what you wrote:
::Some sitters by obtaining good results were fully convinced they were in communication with the deceased, while with others with whom errors predominated their reading were of the opinion Mrs. Piper was a cunning, crafty person judiciously "fishing" the the information out of the sitters, then retailing it back. They had no hestitation in proclaiming this in their reports; they stated it in very plain language. <ref>''Richard Hodgson'' by A.T. Baird, Psychic Press Limited, London, 1949, page 47, biography welcomed by The Council of the Society for Psychical Research</ref>
:Even if this is exactly what Baird wrote in his book, there are probably still some issues with this contribution. If you could fix those issues, the contribution would be less likely to be reverted by other editors. Despite what you may think, most editors on Wikipedia are willing to accept well-sourced, well-phrased contributions, even if they don't agree with the content. So I think you need to work on two things: 1) how you source your contributions, and 2) how you phrase your contributions. Getting content accepted on Wikipedia is not about who likes you, it's about the quality of your contributions.
:Let's start with attribution. A clear difference between the statements preceding yours, and your sentences, is that those preceding are attributed to someone: Martin Gardner. Where it says "Martin Gardner published two exposés...", that's the attribution. Your contribution has no attribution. Citing someone in a reference after a statement is ''not'' considered an attribution on Wikipedia. Therefore, one improvement that could be made to your contribution would be to attribute it to Baird. Your could therefore rephrase your contribution, thus:
::According to A T Baird, some sitters by obtaining good results were fully convinced they were in communication with the deceased, while with others with whom errors predominated their reading were of the opinion Mrs. Piper was a cunning, crafty person judiciously "fishing" the the information out of the sitters, then retailing it back. Baird states that the sitters had no hestitation in proclaiming this in their reports; they stated it in very plain language. <ref>''Richard Hodgson'' by A.T. Baird, Psychic Press Limited, London, 1949, page 47, biography welcomed by The Council of the Society for Psychical Research</ref>
:The difference is clear. Now instead of the information being presented as if it was "fact", it is clearly attributed to Baird as his opinion. We must ''always'' attribute statements to people or groups on Wikipedia, unless the statement is uncontroversial to most experts in the area, in which case we still need to provide a reference afterwards. For example, the article on [[evolution]] defines it as "the change over time in one or more inherited traits found in inter-breeding populations of organisms" without providing any attribution as to whose perspective this is, because it's the accepted wisdom among experts in the area, and the article simply provides a single recent textbook on evolution as the source. What's significant here is that your contribution is ''not'' of that nature. It is a statement of one person's opinion, probably a somewhat controversial opinion on a little-studied historical area, and the credentials of that person as a relatively undisputed expert presenting the most commonly accepted perspective on the subject are not clear.
:I'll stop there, and you can let me know if that makes sense to you.? If so, there's plenty more advice I can give on contributing to Wikipedia. For example, the change I suggest above is still probably not enough to get your contribution accepted on that page. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 00:29, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
I kind of dropped out of Leonora Piper. I didn't think it would raise such a fuss. Leonora Piper is a tough one. There is so much data, so much missing data and data that just does not make any sense at all. I do not think Baird is lying. He is just looking at what Piper's clients concluded. But the only way to verify that is to see and know exactly what Baird is reading. "They stated it in very plain language." William James' sister sure put it in plain language. If I remember correctly she wrote Piper was "that horrid woman." I began to accept all the Piper digging and sharing with others just wasn't worth all the rejection. It wasn't fun anymore. The subject of continuing consciousness after death is a touchy subject to some people. It is difficult for me to understand not everyone else is as curious as myself. It has gotten me in a lot of trouble. Que sera sera. Thanks for helping, Ryan. Oh and you are wrong some people just don't like me and they have stated it in very plain language. "I DO NOT LIKE YOU!" [[User:Kazuba|Kazuba]] ([[User talk:Kazuba|talk]]) 06:57, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

:I'm using your contribution to Leonora Piper as an example, but the point I'm making is a general one about the manner of your contribution. There are several problems in the way you wrote your contribution, and they are the kind of problems that will cause other editors to revert your writing (whether they like you as an editor or not). You need to write "X said Y". You need to make sure that the source you reference is a [[WP:RS|reliable source]], and you may need to go to some effort to demonstrate this to other editors on the talk page. You need to phrase your contributions so that it's clear that you're just summarising or directly quoting the source - direct quotes should be in quotation marks. And so forth. These are all points that are covered in various Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Wikipedia articles can't use your personal experiences or anecdotes or opinions, which is why people aren't likely to be interested in your stories and may consider them inappropriate distractions or self-promotion. Wikipedia is about getting across points from reliable sources in a clear, neutral manner. I'm happy to help you learn how to do that. But I think you may first need to get past this sense of persecution that you're expressing here, it's just a barrier you're creating for yourself. Wikipedia is made up of thousands of editors, and they're not all out to get you - but you WILL encounter persistent resistance and annoyance from other editors if your contributions continue to not follow the policies & guidelines. If you change your approach to editing, you may be surprised at the change in the response you'll get. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 00:33, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
I have done that before. If they don't like your stuff it does not matter. If those are the rules of the wikpedia shouldn't the reader expect you are following rules when they first read it. And if they have specific questions the reader will contact the writer before the material is deleted. Instead of first deleting the material before they contact the writer, or not contact the writer at all. Folks like to make those quick decisions. You have too much power on the tube. It is too easy to do it on the net. It is not like you are looking at each other face to face as in real life. Thanks anyway. Leonora Piper is history. And so am I at present. But I'll be back! Thanks again. Maybe when I get the information of how and when Jesus got the popular vote and officialy became God in the 4th century [[User:Kazuba|Kazuba]] ([[User talk:Kazuba|talk]]) 23:28, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

:I like the way bad edits are quickly removed on Wikipedia, it keeps the quality high. While it would be nice if every reversion was discussed with the editors involved, that's a lot to expect from volunteer editors. Wikipedia isn't about the editors and their hurt feelings, it's about the quality of the content of the articles. If you do come back to editing Wikipedia, I recommend that you try to internalise the policies and guidelines so that your posts are less likely to get reverted. You may also need to grow a thicker skin for dealing with times when you do get reverted, because it happens to everyone and it's not a bad thing. Try to focus on the content, not the personalities. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 02:35, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
I no longer take the Wikipedia seriously. I find it fun and amusing. You need to have a sense of humor. Regardless of your quality of content I charge you now and then encounter a small number of dingbats. They do exist you know. [[User:Kazuba|Kazuba]] ([[User talk:Kazuba|talk]]) 02:51, 1 March 201(UTC

Notice in the [[Dean Radin]] entry there is hardly any information on his individual experiments. You would at least expect to to see some tiny mention about his experiments on intentional chocolate, his experiments with clay dolls for remote healing and his personal claimed success at a spoon bending party. If it was known and documented wouldn't you? [[User:Kazuba|Kazuba]] ([[User talk:Kazuba|talk]]) 03:42, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

:If that content was significant and was covered in reliable sources, then it would be nice to have. Otherwise, it's best not to have it. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 20:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
I totally agree. It did. [[User:Kazuba|Kazuba]] ([[User talk:Kazuba|talk]]) 01:04, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

==Some of Dean Radin research includes:==

*[[Random number generator]]s and world events: Events which capture the attention of many people may affect random number generators.<ref>''The Conscious Universe: The Scientific Truth of Psychic Phenomena'' by Dean Radin, 1997 </ref> Other publications report analytical studies on how lunar cycles may affect psi and winning at one gambling casino. Winnings on slot machines rise 2% during a full-moon.<ref>''Seeking psi in the casino.'' Radin, C.I. & Rebman, J. M. (1998), Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 62 (850), 193-219</ref>

*[[Precognition|Presentiment]] experiments: Experimental tests of presentiment effects in the autonomic and central nervous system.

*[[Intention research]]: Radin's research concluded that intentionally enhanced chocolate significantly decreases stress, increases calmness, and lessens fatigue in those who eat it. [http://www.intentionalchocolate.com/content/Research.htm]<ref>Radin DI, Hayssen G, Walsh J. (2007). Effects of intentionally enhanced chocolate on mood, Explore: The Journal of Science and Healing. , Volume 3, pp. 485-492</ref> "If the Pope blessed water, everyone wants the water. But does it actually do something?" Radins asks. "The answer is yes, to a small extent."<ref> ''Mind over Chocolate'' by Alana B. Elias Kornfeld, TIME magazine, April 6, 2009, page 58</ref>

*[[Remote healing]]: Subjects constructed clay dolls of themselves. His research showed that the subjects' blood and nerve activity increases when a "healer" {{convert|100|yd}} away massaged the dolls.<ref>[http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/archives/1996/sep/14/505088006.html] The scientific edge, UNLV professor explores the link between mind and matter by Mary Manning, LAS VEGAS SUN, 14 Sep 1996.</ref>Radin also tested [[Umbanda]] mediums in Brazil, who attempted to send healing thoughts to American subjects at UNLV. These healing thoughts were not only sent to specific individuals but also ''back in time.''<ref>[http://users.lycaeum.org/~maverick/radin.htm] David Jay Brown Interviews Dean Radin </ref>

*[[Psychokinesis]]: In 2000 Radin attended a [[spoon bending]] party. To his surprise the spoon he was holding started to bend. The bowl momentarily felt like putty. Using one finger and thumb he easily pinched the end of the bowl over, nearly bending the bowl to half its length. Dean had decided in advance that the only bend he might find interesting would be of the bowl of a spoon, because to do this without tools and/or leverage is beyond the capability of most people, including himself. The silver-plated soup spoon he held bent as he had previously desired. {{Fact|date=April 2009}}<ref> See this entry's discussion page: Spoon Bending </ref>

*[[Kinesiology]]: Radin ran double-blind and triple-blind trials with 58 adults using vials of sugar and sand and a dynamometer, which measures a hand's grip strength. The results seemed to show that people's muscle strength decreased significantly when they held vials of sugar.<ref>[http://www.deanradin.com/nytimes.html] They Laughed at Galileo Too by Chip Brown, 1996 The New York Times Company
August 11, 1996, Sunday, Late Edition - Final
Section 6; Page 41; Column 2; Magazine Desk</ref>

*[[Robotics]]: Subjects attempt to manipulate a robotic arm to pick up an M & M. Unobserved, the robotic arm can complete the job in 25 steps. With a human's mental attention to the task, the job can be done in two steps.<ref name="deanradin.com">[http://www.deanradin.com/nytimes.html] They Laughed at Galileo Too by Chip Brown, 1996 The New York Times Company
August 11, 1996, Sunday, Late Edition - Final
Section 6; Page 41; Column 2; Magazine Desk </ref>

*[[Psychics]]: "The best psychic averages about 3 in 10, like the best baseball hitters .300," says Radin, "the rest of us bat about 1 or 2 in 10." <ref> The scientific edge, UNLV professor explores the link between mind and matter by Mary Manning, LAS VEGAS SUN, 14 Sep 1996, [http.//www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/archives/1996/sep/14/505088006.html]</ref> According to [[Ed May]], remote viewers in the [[Stargate Project]] were wrong 80 percent of the time and correct 20 percent of the time. Radin wrote that the probable reality of [[remote viewing]] was scientifically established by the US government's [[Stargate Project]].<ref>[http://deanradin.blogspot.com/2006/06/weird-science.html Weird Science]. A post on Radin's blog on 12 Jun 2006 </ref>

*[[Remote viewing and future machines]]: While Dean Radin was at the Conscious Research Laboratory, University of Nevada, Las Vegas he worked with remote viewer [[Joseph McMoneagle]]. Radin conceptualized a future machine that as yet did not exist. McMoneagle used his remote viewing into the future in an effort to obtain information concerning this machine to produce patentable ideas.<ref>''The Ulitimate Time Machine: A Remote Viewer's Perception of Time and Predictions for the New Millennium'' by Joseph McMoneagle, Hampton Roads, Publishing Co., Inc., 1998, p.109 </ref>

{{reflist}}

I'm not sure why you're posting this on my talk page. It's the kind of content that woul dbe bette rposted on the talk page for Dean Radin. I don't have any particular interest in the subject or know anything about the person in question. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 08:07, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

This is an example of my work that was included in the Dean Radin entry. Not the talk page. I just wanted to show you what I do. And how deep I go. I love to learn new things. (and hopefully share them) I thought my materials fullfilled the Wikipedia requirements. You see I have a slight interest in parapsycholgy and those who call themselves parapsychologists. Others did not share my interests. My materials were totally deleted sources and and all. I contend it was by persons who found my materials worthless. That's all. [[User:Kazuba|Kazuba]] ([[User talk:Kazuba|talk]]) 16:55, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

== larp page ==

if you're the acting sheriff of the larp page, what's your opinion on the latex weapon and two pictures of the quebec battles? i try to avoid to using really tall pictures like the weapon one due to formatting, and the other two are relatively low quality and resolution pictures. i have a variety of dagorhir pictures, but only dagorhir pictures, so i can't supply to the article without overloading it. is there a type of picture would be good for replacing them? specific types of larping?
[[User:Evan-Amos|Evan-Amos]] ([[User talk:Evan-Amos|talk]]) 22:33, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

:Hey there. I'm not [[WP:OWN|sheriff]], I'm just one of several editors who work on that page, although it is one I watch closely. The height of the latex weapon pic does cause minor formatting issues, but I think we should only remove it if we're replacing it with a better weapon pic. I don't think the quality or res of the other two pictures is too low (they're 600x400), and again I think they should only be removed if we have better images of the same sort of subjects (a large battle and a purpose-built venue). As you say we can't load the page up with lots of Dagorhir photos (or any other single type of larp) because that wouldn't be representative of the variety of larp out there. I'm happy that we have a Dagahir image in the history section now. It would be nice to have an image in each of the sections that don't currently have one, but they need to be relevant to the section they're in. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 01:01, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

:In my opinion, the ideal photo of a big battle might show some people fighting in the foreground, with a battle happening behind them. That way it would be clearer what's happening in the picture at the small thumb size shown on the article. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 01:04, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

::not literal sheriff, but it's easy to see people who watch over the pages and keep tabs. as for pictures, i might comb through flickr for something, though the weapons might be hard. there's also a difference between homemade weapons and the type like the store-bought latex ones. do you think one is more common than the other? i'm not sure which ones are more common, as i'm not really that knowledgeable about this community.
::[[User:Evan-Amos|Evan-Amos]] ([[User talk:Evan-Amos|talk]]) 11:50, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

:::The home-made weapons made with PVC cores are more common in the US, although I understand latex weapons (with fibreglass cores) are growing in popularity. In Europe it's the opposite, nearly all weapons in most European countries are latex, and PVC-core weapons aren't accepted in most games. And then there's Russia and Eastern Europe... where metal and wooden weapons are the norm for live roleplaying. So it's very regional. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 18:14, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

== Cabal of Mediation ==

Hello, my name is Asinthior and I will be your mediator. I have no prior knowledge of Israel and the Apartheid Analogy, which I think is a good thing as I will be able to provide a pair of fresh eyes and I won't have any prejudice on the matter. I hope we can all actively participate in the solution of this dispute. Feel free to leave a note at my talk page at any time. I will be available through the weekend. [[User:Asinthior|Asinthior]] ([[User talk:Asinthior|talk]]) 14:48, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

:Okay, thanks for volunteering. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 19:53, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

::Could we please transfer the discussion to the Mediation Cabal [[Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2011-04-17/Israel_and_the_Apartheid_Analogy#Mediator_notes|case page]]? In other words, all further comments concerning this dispute and how to insert the controversial paragraph into the [[Israel and the apartheid analogy|article]] should be done at case page until we close the case. If you agree, please state so in the discussion section of the case page. [[User:Asinthior|Asinthior]] ([[User talk:Asinthior|talk]]) 12:50, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

:::I've read the subsection of the discussion page for the article in dispute. As the Mediation Cabal did not have an immediate response, I feel the debate have moved to a new topic. I would ask all concerned parties to make a '''very short''' statement trying to define as narrowly as possible what is the topic of the dispute and what would be the expected outcome. Please do this in the discussion section of [[Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2011-04-17/Israel_and_the_Apartheid_Analogy#Mediator_notes|this]] page. [[User:Asinthior|Asinthior]] ([[User talk:Asinthior|talk]]) 15:00, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

== Friar Tuck ==

Thanks for jumping into the discussion. I found out about Friar Tuck earlier this morning at one of the reference desks and decided that is the appropriate equivalent to the "Fray" treatment. Looking forward to working with you and the other two users in solving the dispute. [[User:Asinthior|Asinthior]] ([[User talk:Asinthior|talk]]) 22:38, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

== Mediation Cabal: Israel and the Apartheid Analogy ==

It's been exactly one month since [[User:Tempered]] last contributed to WP. I think you can go ahead and do the edits you were disputing about. If he comes back and still has a problem, we can mediate then. Just throw me a line at my talk page. <big>[[User:Asinthior|Asinthior]] ([[User talk:Asinthior#top|talk]])</big> 16:20, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

:I'll think on it, see if there's any way to take his concerns into account before editing. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 22:07, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

== Osteopathy ==
The only argument I could see for your revision was:

"Original text was more informative"

That which is accurate is informative. That which is inaccurate in not informative. I replaced an inaccurate statement for an accurate statement. If you have some special contest for this please message me before you change the definition of an entire profession. — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Theroofbeam|Theroofbeam]] ([[User talk:Theroofbeam|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Theroofbeam|contribs]]) 19:34, 26 July 2011 (UTC) 

I understand you have been editing the osteopathy page for a long time but this does not make your arguments any more accurate than mine. Please outline a better argument for why osteopathy is an alternative medicine before editing the page again.

Osteopathy

2011-07-27T21:06:36Z

Theroofbeam: osteopathy uses orthodox scientific research as a basis for clinical decisions which makes it not alternative but conventional medicine. to claim the international sense is different than the patent practiced reality of osteopathy is false.

{{See also|Osteopathic manipulative medicine}}
'''Osteopathy''' and '''osteopathic medicine''' are often used inter-changeably<ref>"Osteopathy", ''Stedman's Medical Dictionary''</ref> for the philosophy and system of [[Medicine]] first proposed by [[A. T. Still]] MD, DO in 1874.
It emphasizes the interrelationship between [[Human musculoskeletal system|structure]] and [[medical condition|function]] of the [[human body|body]] and recognizes the body's ability to heal itself; it is the role of the osteopathic practitioner to facilitate that process.<ref>[http://www.aacom.org/resources/Documents/Downloads/GOT2009ed.pdf]''Glossary of Osteopathic Terminology,'' Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles (ECOP), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), Revised April 2009, p.33 &34.</ref> The [[American Osteopathic Association]] recommends using ''osteopathic physician'' and ''osteopathic medicine'' to describe [[osteopathic medicine in the United States|'American Osteopathy']], practiced by full scope of practice physicians, and using ''osteopath'' and ''osteopathy'' to describe the restricted-scope form of practice in many other jurisdictions.<ref name=style_guide>"Osteopathy should only be used when referring to the occupation of non-physician osteopaths or those trained outside of the United States." [http://www.do-online.org/index.cfm?PageID=mc_kitstyle Osteopathic Style Guide.] [[American Osteopathic Association]].</ref><ref>[http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Resolution301_A2010_FinalVersion.pdf/ House of Delegates Resolution H-301 - RE: H229-A/05 Osteopath & Osteopathy - Use of the Terms]</ref><ref>[http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/?p=26191/ Crosby J. ''Promoting DOs: Words and medium change, but message stays the same.''DO Magazine Online, September 4, 2010.]</ref> Despite this, many osteopathic physicians in the US still use the term ''osteopath''.<ref>[http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/?p=24181/ Scheirhorn, C. AOA asserts preferred terms ''osteopathic physician,'' ''osteopathic medicine,'' DO Magazine Online, August 4, 2010.]</ref>

There is an international organization for individuals, the World Osteopathic Health Organization (WOHO),<ref>[http://www.woho.org/ World Osteopathic Health Organization - World Osteopathic Health Organization]</ref> which permits membership by both 'restricted scope manual therapist' osteopaths and 'full scope of medical practice' osteopathic physicians. Similarly, there is also an international organization of organizations for national osteopathic and osteopathic medical associations, statutory regulators, and universities/medical schools offering osteopathic and osteopathic medical education, known as the Osteopathic International Alliance (OIA).<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/ Osteopathic International Alliance]</ref>

==History==
{{See also|Andrew Taylor Still#Osteopathy|l1=Andrew Taylor Still: Osteopathy}}
The practice of osteopathy began in the United States in 1874. The term "osteopathy" was coined by [[Andrew Taylor Still]], MD, DO. Still was a physician & surgeon,<ref>[http://cdm.sos.mo.gov/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/atsu&CISOPTR=693&REC=1/ ''Medical Registration for Macon County, MO as of March 27, 1874,'' Missouri Digital Heritage, Secretary of State of Missouri.]</ref><ref>[http://cdm.sos.mo.gov/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/atsu&CISOPTR=759&CISOBOX=1&REC=2/ ''Medical registration for Adair County, MO dated July 28, 1883,'' Missouri Digital Heritage, Secretary of State of Missouri.] Note: The state of Missouri did not have legislation requiring medical registration until March 27, 1874.</ref> Kansas state & territorial legislator,<ref>[http://cdm.sos.mo.gov/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/atsu&CISOPTR=685&REC=2/ ''Six Survivors of First Free State Legislature in Kansas, Topeka Daily Capital,''Missouri's Digital Heritage,Secretart of State of Missouri.]</ref> a [[Slave and free states|free state]] leader,<ref>[http://cdm.sos.mo.gov/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/atsu&CISOPTR=670&REC=1/ Charles E. Still (son) – Letters to Edith Mellor, DO. Missouri’s Digital Heritage, Secretary of State of Missouri.]</ref> and one of the founders of [[Baker University]],<ref>Autobiography of A.T. Still, A.T. Still, Kirksville, Missouri, 1908, p. 97-8.</ref> who lived near [[Baldwin City, Kansas]] at the time of the [[American Civil War]]. In Baldwin, he developed the practice of osteopathy.<ref>[http://www.lasr.net/pages/city.php?Baldwin%20City&Kansas&City_ID=KS0301001&VA=Y&Attraction_ID=KS0301001a017 Baldwin City, Kansas] "Among Free State leaders was Andrew T. Still, founder of osteopathy, whose theory of healing developed here."</ref>

Still named his new school of medicine "osteopathy," reasoning that "the bone, osteon, was the starting point from which [he] was to ascertain the cause of pathological conditions."<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.meridianinstitute.com/eamt/files/webster1/webcont.html#HOW%20I%20CAME%20TO%20ORIGINATE%20OSTEOPATHY |title=Early American Manual Therapy}}</ref> Still founded the American School of Osteopathy (now [[A.T. Still University]] of the Health Sciences) in [[Kirksville, Missouri|Kirksville]], [[Missouri]], for the teaching of osteopathy on May 10, 1892. While the state of Missouri, recognizing the equivalency of the curriculum, was willing to grant him a charter for awarding the MD degree, he remained dissatisfied with the limitations of conventional medicine and instead chose to retain the distinction of the DO degree.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://history.osteopathic.org/educate.shtml |title=Education firmly established |publisher=American Osteopathic Association}}</ref>

==Osteopathic principles==
The osteopathic medical philosophy is defined as the concept of health care that embraces the concept of the unity of the living organism’s structure (anatomy) and function (physiology). These are the four major principles of osteopathy:<ref>[http://www.aacom.org/resources/Documents/Downloads/GOT2009ed.pdf]''Glossary of Osteopathic Terminology,'' Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles (ECOP), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), Revised April 2009, p.33.</ref>

# The body is a unit. An integrated unit of mind, body, and spirit (Triune of Man - A.T. Still).
# The body possesses [[Homeostasis|self-regulatory mechanisms]], having the inherent capacity to defend, repair, and remodel itself.
# Structure and function are reciprocally inter-related.
# Rational therapy is based on consideration of the first three principles.
These principles are not held by osteopathic physicians to be [[Scientific law|empirical law]]s; they serve, rather, as the underpinnings of the osteopathic philosophy on health and disease.

==Techniques of osteopathic treatment==
{{Main|Osteopathic manipulative medicine}}
Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) is the therapeutic application of manually guided forces by an osteopathic physician (U.S. usage) to improve physiologic function and/or support homeostasis that has been altered by somatic dysfunction.<ref name="aacom.org">[http://www.aacom.org/resources/Documents/Downloads/GOT2009ed.pdf/ Glossary of Osteopathic Terminology, Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles (ECOP), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), Revised April 2009, page 28.]</ref> Somatic dysfunction is defined as impaired or altered function of related components of the somatic (body framework) system: skeletal, arthrodial and myofascial structures and their related vascular, lymphatic and neural elements. Acute somatic dysfunction is an immediate or short-term impairment or altered function of related components of the somatic(body) framework. It is characterized in early stages by vasodilation, edema, tenderness, pain and tissue contraction. It is diagnosed by history and palpatory assessment of tenderness, asymmetry of motion and relative position, restriction of motion and tissue texture change.<ref name="GOT2009ed 2009, page 53">[http://www.aacom.org/resources/Documents/Downloads/GOT2009ed.pdf/ Glossary of Osteopathic Terminology, Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles (ECOP), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), Revised April 2009, page 53.]</ref> Chronic somatic dysfunction is the impairment or altered function of related components of the somatic (body framework) system. It may be characterized by tenderness, itching, fibrosis, paresthesias and tissue contraction.<ref name="GOT2009ed 2009, page 53"/>

While there are many treatment techniques, OMT methods utilized may broadly be classified as active or passive and direct or indirect in nature.

:''Active Method:'' A technique in which the person voluntarily performs an osteopathic practitioner-directed motion.<ref name="aacom.org"/>

:''Passive Method:'' Based on techniques in which the patient refrains from voluntary muscle contraction.<ref>[http://www.aacom.org/resources/Documents/Downloads/GOT2009ed.pdf/ Glossary of Osteopathic Terminology, Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles (ECOP), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), Revised April 2009, page 34.]</ref>

:''Direct Method (D/DIR):'' An osteopathic treatment strategy by which the restrictive barrier is engaged and a final activating force is applied to correct somatic dysfunction.<ref name="GOT2009ed 2009, page 29">[http://www.aacom.org/resources/Documents/Downloads/GOT2009ed.pdf/ Glossary of Osteopathic Terminology, Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles (ECOP), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), Revised April 2009, page 29.]</ref>

:''Indirect Method (I/IND):'' A manipulative technique where the restrictive barrier is disengaged and the dysfunctional body part is moved away from the restrictive barrier until tissue tension is equal in one or all planes and directions.<ref name="GOT2009ed 2009, page 29"/>

===Scope of manual therapies===

While not a comprehensive list, OMT employs a variety of techniques including:

* [[Articulatory technique]]
* [[Balanced ligamentous tension]] (also known as balanced ligamentous tension release, ligamentous articular strain)
* [[Craniosacral Therapy]]
* [[Counterstrain]]
* [[HVLA]] (also known as High Velocity/Low Amplitude or Thrust Technique)
* Inhibitory Pressure Technique<ref name="acofp.org">[http://www.acofp.org/resources/OMT/articles/0104_2_4.html/ ''Sacrum (inhibitory pressure) Technique,'' American Osteopathic College of Family Practice]</ref>
* Mandibular Drainage Technique<ref>[http://www.acofp.org/resources/OMT/articles/1004_1_3.html/ ''Mandibular Drainage of Galbreath,'' American Osteopathic College of Family Practice]</ref>
* [[Muscle energy technique]]
* [[Myofascial Release]]
* Joint Mobilization Technique
* Soft Tissue Therapy Techniques
* PNF Technique
* Range of Motion Technique
* Visceral Manipulation

Many osteopaths also manage and/or co-manage organic or Type-O disorders and conditions, such as asthma and [[Otitis media|middle ear infection]]s in children,<ref>{{Cite journal|author=Mills M, Henley C, Barnes L, Carreiro J, Degenhardt B |title=The use of osteopathic manipulative treatment as adjuvant therapy in children with recurrent acute otitis media |journal=Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med |volume=157 |issue=9 |pages=861–6 |year=2003 |pmid=12963590 | doi = 10.1001/archpedi.157.9.861}}</ref> menstrual pain,<ref name="acofp.org"/> and pulmonary infection. A small subdivision of UK Osteopathic practitioners, following the teachings of John Martin Littlejohn and John Wernham, are known as "Classical Osteopaths". They practice a style of whole or "total" body adjustment which contends that structural strains and patterns, through effects on circulation, reflexes and sensory feedback, precede pathological tissue states. This is said to be due to the downrating, for example, of arterial microcirculation or lymphatic drainage. Treatment is said to lead to successful patient outcomes in a great number of functional and pathological disorders, including infections and degenerative conditions. Great emphasis is made of clearance of the products of metabolism, which place a load on metabolic toxin clearance mechanisms and are said to be irritative. The approach is contentious even within Osteopathy, in a similar way to Cranial Osteopathy. It is no longer taught at undergraduate level in the UK following the loss of GOSc accreditation by the Maidstone school, and is taught as a post graduate specialty.

==Research==

On February 2–4, 1975, a research symposium organized and conducted by the [[National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke]] was held at the [[National Institutes of Health]] on The Research Status of Spinal Manipulative Therapy. Papers were presented and discussed by the 116 participants. Basic scientists reviewed information about the status of research and research findings on the pathological spinal cord "nidus" fundamental to the clinical concepts on which manipulative therapy is based (i.e. chiropractic subluxation; osteopathic lesion; patho-physiological zone of neural hyper-excitability). Although focusing on the biology and therapy of back pain, there was discussion of other neuromuscular disorders and of visceral disorders in which manipulative therapy is used. The basic science studies presented were in anatomy, biochemistry, biomechanics, and neuroscience. Clinical investigators with chiropracatic, osteopathic and medical backgrounds presented papers on research findings from pathology, radiology and clinical evaluations; the latter primarily observational studies. Following this in-depth analysis of what was known at that time about spinal manipulative therapy and the principles on which it was founded, there was group discussion of what was not known and what needed to be known. Recommendations were made about research questions requiring targeted additional attention and the priority need for the establishment of research training opportunities in chiropractic and osteopathic professional schools. Basic and clinical investigators in medical schools commented that their laboratories were available for collaborative research training and research project endeavors for colleagues with chiropractic or osteopathic backgrounds.<ref>[http://nccam.nih.gov/news/events/Manual-Therapy/historical.htm/ Goldstein, Murray. The Research Status of Spinal Manipulative Therapy. DHEW Publication No. (NIH) 76-998: NINDS Monograph No. 15; 1975]</ref>

Several large studies in the UK have produced evidence that demonstrates positive clinical and cost effectiveness of manipulation in the management of lower back pain, the latest being the UK Back pain Exercise And Manipulation (UK BEAM) trial. The physical manipulation condition of the UK BEAM trial involved "... a package of techniques representative of those used by the UK chiropractic, osteopathic, and physiotherapy professions."<ref>[http://www.bmj.com/content/329/7479/1377.full.pdf/ UK Back Pain Exercise and Manipulation (UK BEAM) Trial Team. ''United Kingdom back pain exercise and manipulation (UK BEAM) randomized trial: effectiveness of physical treatments for back pain in primary care.''BMJ. 11 December 2004;329(7479):1377.]</ref><ref>[http://www.bmj.com/content/329/7479/1381.abstract/ ''United Kingdom back pain exercise and manipulation (UK BEAM) randomized trial: cost effectiveness of physical treatments for back pain in primary care.''BMJ. 11 December 2004;329(7479):1381.]</ref>

In a 2005 meta-analysis and systematic review of six randomized controlled trials of [[Osteopathic manipulative medicine|osteopathic manipulative treatment]] (OMT) that involved blinded assessments of lower back pain in ambulatory settings, it was concluded that OMT significantly reduces [[lower back pain]], and that the level of pain reduction is greater than expected from [[placebo]] effects alone and persists for at least three months.<ref>{{Cite journal|author=Licciardone JC, Brimhall AK, King LN |title=Osteopathic manipulative treatment for low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |journal=BMC Musculoskelet Disord |volume=6 |issue= |page=43 |year=2005 |pmid=16080794 |pmc=1208896 |doi=10.1186/1471-2474-6-43 |url=}}</ref>

The [NIH's [National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine]] states<ref>[http://nccam.nih.gov/health/pain/spinemanipulation.htm/ National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine]</ref> that overall, studies have shown that spinal manipulation can provide mild-to-moderate relief from low-back pain and appears to be as effective as conventional medical treatments. In 2007 guidelines, the [[American College of Physicians]] and the American Pain Society include spinal manipulation as one of several treatment options for practitioners to consider using when pain does not improve with self-care.<ref>[Chou R, Qaseem A, Snow V, et al. ''Diagnosis and treatment of low-back pain: a joint clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Pain Society.'' Annals of Internal Medicine. 2007;147(7):478-491.]</ref><ref>[http://www.annals.org/content/147/7/492.full.pdf+html/ Chou R, Huffman LH. ''Nonpharmacologic therapies for acute and chronic low-back pain: a review of the evidence for and American Pain Society/American College of Physicians clinical practice guideline.'' Annals of Internal Medicine. 2007;147(7):492-504.]</ref> Recent research into spinal manipulation for low-back pain has begun to look at the effects of different forms of manipulation, as well as treatment duration and frequency. Studies have found that spinal manipulation provides relief from low-back pain at least over the short term (i.e., up to 3 months), and that pain-relieving effects may continue for up to 1 year. Spinal manipulation is generally a safe treatment for low-back pain. Serious complications are very rare.<ref>[http://nccam.nih.gov/health/pain/D409_GTF.pdf/''Get the Facts: Spinal Manipulation for Low Back Pain,'' National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine]</ref>

==Osteopathy around the world==
The osteopathic profession has evolved into two branches, non-physician manual medicine osteopaths and full scope of medical practice osteopathic physicians. These groups are so distinct that in practice they function as separate professions. In recent years, the profession has actively attempted to enhance exchange and dialogue between them. Manual osteopaths who have graduated from a recognized college and are members of International Osteopathic Association may practice in all countries. In certain countries such as Canada and the USA they may not provide joint manipulation and diagnosis as these are regulated acts.<ref>

{{Cite journal| author = Wickless, Larry | title = The Osteopathic International Alliance: Unification of the Osteopathic Profession | publisher = Osteopathic International Alliance Steering Committee | url = http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/oia_article_triad0905.pdf | format = PDF | accessdate = 19 September 2006}}</ref>

The following sections describe the legal status of ''Osteopathy'' and ''Osteopathic Medicine'' in each country listed:

===Australia===
''Osteopaths'' are primary contact health professionals who, in their own practice, make independent judgments in the examination, diagnosis, treatment, prevention and care of conditions of the human body to the extent of their individual competence. Osteopaths work in private practice, and the majority of private health insurance providers cover treatment performed by osteopaths.<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/australia_osteopathy.pdf/ ''Osteopathy in Australia,'' Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed February 26, 2011.]</ref>

A few publicly-funded Australian universities now offer degrees in osteopathy: [[RMIT University]] (formerly The Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology),<ref>[http://rmit.edu.au/browse;ID=dqsazel66a2u;STATUS=A?QRY=osteopathy&STYPE=ENTIRE]</ref> [[Victoria University of Technology]],<ref>[http://www.vu.edu.au/courses/bachelor-of-science-clinical-sciences-hbop/]</ref><ref>[http://www.vu.edu.au/courses/master-of-health-science-osteopathy-hmos/ Master of Health Sciences - Osteopathy]</ref> [[University of Western Sydney]] (UWS) and [[Southern Cross University]].<ref>[http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/hahs/index.php/42/ School of Health & Human Sciences - Osteopathy, Southern Cross University]</ref>

The Osteopathy Board of Australia<ref>[http://www.osteopathyboard.gov.au/Codes-and-Guidelines.aspx/ Osteopathy Board of Australia Codes & Guidelines of the Profession]</ref> is part of the Australia Health Professions Regulatory Agency.<ref>[http://www.ahpra.gov.au/ Australia Health Professions Regulatory Agency]</ref>

===Canada===
The first self-identified college of Osteopathy in Canada opened in 1981. There are 7 osteopathy colleges in Canada teaching in Montreal, Quebec City, Toronto, Hamilton, Vancouver, Ottawa, Winnipeg, Calgary & Edmonton. Currently there is a testing centre for manual osteopathic practitioners in Canada. The purpose of the Canadian Manual Osteopathy Examining Board (CMOEB) is to establish and maintain uniform high standards of excellence in the manual osteopathy profession and education, primarily but not exclusively by preparing and administering to qualified applicants examinations of superior quality, whereby those legal agencies which govern the manual osteopathic practice within each province and other countries may accept, at their discretion, those individuals who have successfully completed any part of the examinations of CMOEB, and by providing test and measurement services to the manual osteopathy profession in all areas of demonstrated need, and to advance the manual osteopathy profession when in the best interests of manual osteopathy testing. Manual osteopaths who pass exams administered by Canadian Manual Osteopathy Examining Board are permitted to join [[International Osteopathic Association]] (IOA) and receive certificate of registration. Neither the CMOEB or IOA are recognized or accredited by any Canadian federal or provincial regulatory authority.<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/canada_osteopathy.pdf/ Osteopathic International Alliance Statement Regarding Non-physician Osteopaths in Canada]</ref>

The authority for licensing of US-trained osteopathic physicians lies with the provincial Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons. <ref>[http://osteopathic.ca/Osteopathic%20Practice%20in%20Canada.doc Canadian Osteopathic Practice (.doc)]</ref> <ref> http://www.ontarioosteopaths.com/objective.html </ref> <ref>[http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_91m30_e.htm Ontario Medicine Act – Restricted Titles, Section 9]</ref><ref>[http://www.cpso.on.ca/policies/policies/default.aspx?ID=1654/ Ontario College of Physicians Doctor of Osteopathy Registration Policy Statement]</ref><ref>[http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/19_416_2008/ ''British Columbia Medical Practitioners Act,'' Section 40 Registration of Osteopaths]</ref><ref>[http://www.canlii.org/ab/laws/sta/m-11/20060310/whole.html/ ''Alberta Medical Profession Act,'' Sections 3 and 18]</ref><ref>[http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Acts/h07.pdf/ ''Alberta Health Professions Act,'' Schedule 21 - Use of Titles]</ref> The Ontario Medicine Act 1991 states that ''“No person other than a member (registered with the College of Physicians & Surgeons) shall use the titles “osteopath”, “physician” or “surgeon”, a variation or abbreviation or an equivalent in another language. 1991, c. 30, s. 9 (1).”'' and ''“No person other than a member shall hold himself or herself out as a person who is qualified to practise in Ontario as an osteopath, physician or surgeon or in a specialty of medicine. 1991, c. 30, s. 9 (3).”'' Membership in the College of Physicians and Surgeons requires that members are physicians trained in the full scope of medical practice.<ref>[http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_91m30_e.htm/ Ontario Medical Act of 1991.]</ref>Similar title protection laws have been enacted in Alberta<ref>[http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Acts/h07.pdf/ ''Alberta Health Professions Act,'' Schedule 21 - Use of Titles]</ref> and British Columbia.<ref>[http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/19_416_2008/ Health Professions Act, Medical Practitioners Regulation, B.C. Reg. 416/2008]</ref> The Canadian Osteopathic Association<ref>[http://www.osteopathic.ca/index.htm Canadian Osteopathic Association]</ref> has been representing osteopathic physicians in Canada for more than 80 years and has enabled near uniform licensing across Canada for US-trained osteopathic medical graduates.{{details|Osteopathic medicine in the United States|osteopathic physicians trained in the United States|}}



===European Union===
There is no universal regulatory authority for the practice of ''osteopathy'' or ''osteopathic medicine'' within the European Union; it is on a country by country basis. The [[United Kingdom|UK]]'s [[General Osteopathic Council]], a regulatory body set up under the country's [[Osteopaths Act 1993]] has issued a position paper on European regulation of osteopathy.<ref>European Public Health Alliance [http://www.epha.org/a/1673 UK GOsC Position paper on pan-European regulation]. Accessed 2nd August 2006</ref>

[[Spain]] is currently in the official recognition process; nevertheless, it has a national registry.<ref>[http://www.osteopatas.org]</ref> Recognized professionals should be listed on it.<ref>[http://www.osteopatamadrid.com/2009/01/osteopathy-in-spain_14.html ''Osteopathy in Spain'', Ma. Virginia Suarez Pereda, ''Osteopata Madrid'', 14 January 2009].Retrieved on 14 February 2009.</ref>

In [[Austria]] and [[Switzerland]], osteopathic practitioners are [[Doctors of Medicine|MDs]] or Physiotherapists who take additional courses in osteopathy after completing their [[Medical Education|medical training]] or Physical Therapy Training.

===France===

''Osteopathy'' is a governmentally recognized profession and has title protection, ''autorisation d'utiliser le titre d'osteopathe.''<ref>[http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do;jsessionid=E2C6AF0F427389ECA418BB4307239596.tpdjo08v_3?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000000227015&idArticle=&dateTexte=20090604/ Article 75, Public Health Law(2002)]</ref> The most recent decree regarding osteopathy was enacted in 2007, [http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000000462001&dateTexte= ''Décret n° 2007-435 du 25 mars 2007 relatif aux actes et aux conditions d'exercice de l'ostéopathie''].

===Germany===
Germany has both ''osteopathy'' and ''osteopathic medicine.'' There is a difference in the osteopathic education between non-physician osteopaths, physiotherapists, and medical physicians.

Physiotherapists are a recognized health profession and can achieve a degree of “Diploma in Osteopathic Therapy (D.O.T.).” Non-physician ''osteopaths'' are ''not'' medically licensed. They have an average total of 1200 hours of training, roughly half being in manual therapy and osteopathy, with no medical specialization before they attain their degree. Non-physician osteopaths in Germany officially work under the “Heilpraktiker” law. Heilpraktiker is a separate profession within the health care system. There are many schools of Osteopathy in Germany; most are moving toward national recognition although such recognition does not now exist.<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/germany_osteopathy.pdf/ ''Osteopathy in Germany,'' Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed February 26, 2011.]</ref> In [[Germany]] there are rules (at the country level) under which persons (non-[[physician]]s) may call themselves Osteopath.<ref>Verordnung einer Weiterbildungs- und Prüfungsordnung im Bereich der Osteopathie- Hessen, [http://www.rv.hessenrecht.hessen.de/jportal/portal/page/bshesprod.psml?pid=Dokumentanzeige&showdoccase=1&js_peid=Trefferliste&documentnumber=1&numberofresults=37&fromdoctodoc=yes&doc.id=jlr-OsteoWeitBiPrOHErahmen%3Ajuris-lr00&doc.part=X&doc.price=0.0&doc.hl=1 hier online]</ref>

''Osteopathic physicians'' in Germany achieve a degree of “D.O.- DAAO” or “D.O.M.”, from the DAAO and DGOM respectively. Osteopathic physicians in Germany are fully-licensed with at least 6,500 hours in medical school 6 years, at least 7,000 hours in specialty training, which is 3 to 6 years, plus at least 680 hours of training in manual medicine and osteopathy before attaining their degree. German physicians who have obtained the degree designation Dr. med., and who have completed their medical education and specialty training in areas such as general practise, orthopaedics, neurology, internal medicine, etc. can earn a Diploma in Osteopathic Medicine, either a DO-DAAO from the DAAO (German-American Academy for Osteopathy), a DOM™ from the DGOM (German Society of Osteopathic Medicine), or an MDO (Medical Doctor of Osteopathy) from the DGCO (German Society for Chirotherapy and Osteopathy) if additional educational requirements are met. The additional education includes a 320-hour program in manual medicine and an additional minimum of 380 hours in osteopathic medicine, which together makes a minimum of 700 hours. The osteopathic medicine course is limited to physicians only.<ref name="oialliance.org">[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/germany_om.pdf/ ''Osteopathic Medicine in Germany,'' Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed February 25, 2011.]</ref>

The scope of practise for a US-trained osteopathic physician in Germany is unlimited. A foreign physician may apply for licensure with the regional medical authorities, the Health Ministry, which represents the state in which the applicant intends to work. The regional state health ministry has information regarding the types of medical providers needed in that area and therefore grants work permits to licensed physicians depending on the specialty of the foreign physician.<ref name="oialliance.org"/>

===New Zealand===
The practice of ''osteopathy'' is regulated by law, under the terms of the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance [HPCA] Act 2003<ref>[http://www.moh.govt.nz/hpca/ Health Pactitioners Competence Assurance Act (HPCA) of 2003]</ref> which came into effect on 18 September 2004. Under the Act, it is a legal requirement to be registered with the Osteopathic Council of New Zealand [OCNZ],<ref>[www.osteopathiccouncil.org.nz/ Osteopathic Council of New Zealand]</ref> and to hold an annual practicing certificate issued by them, in order to practice as an osteopath. Each of the thirteen healthcare professions regulated by the HPCA Act works within the ‘Scope of Practise’ determined and published by its professional Council. Osteopaths in New Zealand are not fully licensed physicians. In New Zealand, in addition to the general scope of practice, osteopaths may also hold the Scope of Practice for Osteopaths using Western Medical Acupuncture and Related Needling Techniques.<ref>[http://online.gazette.govt.nz/MSOS118/On-Line/NZGazette.nsf/6cee7698a9bbc7cfcc256d510059ed0b/56863e2945a2e287cc25763c004d1a9b?OpenDocument The Department of Internal Affairs: New Zealand Gazette - The New Zealand Gazette]</ref>

In New Zealand a course is offered at [[Unitec New Zealand|Unitec]].<ref>{{Cite web| url = http://www.unitec.ac.nz/?C7B4901F-385F-44F0-B37B-609CE4CC0E1E| title = Master of Osteopathy courses, postgraduate study for a masters degree |accessdate = 26 January 2009| publisher = Unitec| archiveurl =| archivedate =
| quote = The Master of Osteopathy is the only New Zealand-based programme that enables you to register with the Osteopathic Council of New Zealand, and to enter practice as an osteopath in New Zealand.}}</ref> Australasian courses consist of a bachelor's degree in clinical science (Osteopathy) followed by a [[master's degree]]. Graduates of the [[Unitec New Zealand]] program are automatically eligible for registration with the OCNZ.

Osteopaths registered and licensed to practice in any of the Australian states or territories [with the exception of Western Australia] are also eligible to register in New Zealand under the mutual recognition system operating between the two countries. Graduates from programs in every other country are required to complete an assessment procedure.<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/newzealand_osteopathy.pdf/ ''Osteopathy in New Zealand,'' Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed February 26, 2011.]</ref>

The scope of practice for US-trained ''osteopathic physicians'' is unlimited on an ''exceptions'' basis. Full licensure to practice medicine is awarded on an ''exceptions'' basis following a hearing before the licensing authorities in New Zealand. Both the Medical Council of New Zealand<ref>[http://www.mcnz.org.nz/ Medical Council of New Zealand]</ref> and the Osteopathic Council of New Zealand [OCNZ]<ref>[http://www.osteopathiccouncil.org.nz/ Osteopathic Council of New Zealand]</ref> regulate osteopathic physicians in New Zealand. Currently, the country has no recognized osteopathic medical schools.<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/newzealand_om.pdf/ ''Osteopathic Medicine in New Zealand,'' Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed February 26, 2011.]</ref>

===United Kingdom===
The practise of ''osteopathy'' has a long history in the UK. The first school of osteopathy was established in London in 1917 by John Martin Littlejohn, PhD, MD, DO, a pupil of A.T. Still, who had been Dean of The Chicago College of Osteopathic Medicine. After many years of existing outside the mainstream of health care provision, the osteopathic profession in the UK was finally accorded formal recognition by Parliament in 1993 by the Osteopaths Act.<ref>[http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1993/Ukpga_19930021_en_1.htm/ Osteopaths Act 1993]</ref> This legislation now provides the profession of osteopathy the same legal framework of statutory self-regulation as other healthcare professions such as medicine and dentistry.

The [[General Osteopathic Council]] (GOsC) regulates the practise of osteopathy under the terms of the Osteopaths Act 1993. A person cannot practise unless they register with the GOsC. The General Osteopathic Council has a statutory duty to promote, develop and regulate the profession of osteopathy in the UK. It fulfils its duty to protect the interests of the public by ensuring that all osteopaths maintain high standards of safety, competence and professional conduct throughout their professional lives.
In order to be registered with the General Osteopathic Council an osteopath must hold a recognized qualification that meets the standards as set out by law in the GOsC's Standard of Practise.<ref name="osteopathy.org.uk">[http://www.osteopathy.org.uk/about_gosc/about_standards.php Standards of Osteopathic Training & Practise, General Osteopathic Council]</ref> This Act provides for “protection of title” A person who, whether expressly or implication describes himself as an osteopath, osteopathic practitioner, osteopathic physician, osteopathist, osteotherapist, or any kind of osteopath is guilty of an offence unless he is registered as an osteopath. There are currently approximately four thousand osteopaths registered in the UK.<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/uk_osteopathy.pdf/ ''Osteopathy in the United Kingdom,'' Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed February 26, 2011]</ref>

In the United Kingdom, courses in Osteopathy have recently become integrated into the university system. Instead of receiving a Diploma in Osteopathy (DO), with or without a Diploma in Naturopathy (ND), graduates now become Masters or Bachelors of Osteopathy, or Osteopathic Medicine, (BOst or MOst) or else Bachelors of Science (BSc) in Osteopathy or Osteopathic Medicine, according to the institution attended:<ref>[http://www.osteopathy.org.uk/practice/becoming-an-osteopath/training-courses/ ''General Osteopathic Council'']</ref> in this case osteopathy and osteopathic medicine ''are'' synonymous, but ''these degrees'' do ''not'' lead to prescribing rights.

The recognition of osteopathy also means that doctors can now refer patients to osteopaths for treatment with the transfer of clinical responsibility rather than simply delegating the responsibility for care, as is the case with other healthcare professionals. It may or may not be a covered benefit under the National Health Service depending on where in the UK you may live.<ref>[http://www.osteopathy.org.uk/information/nhs-private-treatment/ General Osteopathic Council, accessed 26 February 2011.]</ref>

''Osteopathic medicine'' is regulated by the [[General Osteopathic Council]] (GOsC) and the [[General Medical Council]] (GMC) under the terms of the Osteopaths Act 1993 and statement from the GMC. A person cannot practise unless they register with ''both'' the GMC and GOsC.<ref name="osteopathy.org.uk"/> There is one "cross-over" institution, the London College of Osteopathic Medicine,<ref>[http://www.lcom.org.uk/ ''London College of Osteopathic Medicine'']</ref> which teaches osteopathy only to those who are already physicians.

Foreign-trained osteopathic physicians, who are registered with the GMC and GOsC, hold both a full medical practise and osteopathic license. Each applicant will have to pass the [[Professional and Linguistic Assessment Board test]] (PLAB) and work for one supervised year in the National Health Service (NHS). Following that year, the applicants will be able to apply for full registration (unsupervised practice or private practice). If the physician is already a specialist, postgraduate training will need to be separately recognized by the [[Postgraduate Medical Education and Training Board]] (PMETB).<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/uk_om.pdf/ "Osteopathic Medicine in the United Kingdom," Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed 26 February 2011]</ref>

===United States===
{{Main|Osteopathic medicine in the United States}}
Licensure or registration of non-physician ''osteopaths'' is not permitted anywhere in the United States. There have never been non-physician osteopaths in the US. A.T. Still's American School of Osteopathy, now known as [[A.T. Still University]] of the Health Sciences, was chartered by the state of Missouri to award the MD degree.<ref>[http://history.osteopathic.org/educate.shtml]</ref>

''Osteopathic medicine'' in the United States has always meant a physician trained in and entitled to the full scope of medical practice. ''Osteopathy'' or ''osteopath'' as written in some US state and federal laws refers only to ''osteopathic medicine'' or ''osteopathic physicians,'' respectively.<ref>[http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Resolution301_A2010_FinalVersion.pdf/ ''Resolution 301, H229-A/05 Osteopath & Osteopathy – Use of the Terms,'' Approved by the AOA House of Delegates, July 2010.]</ref> With the increased internationalization of the profession, these older terms have fallen out of favor as generally accepted use due to the confusion they may cause.<ref>[http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/?p=24181/ ''AOA House reasserts preferred terms osteopathic physician, osteopathic medicine,'' Carolyn Schierhorn, The DO, August 4, 2010.]</ref><ref>[http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/?p=26191''Promoting DOs: Words, medium change, but message stays the same,'' John B. Crosby, JD - AOA Executive Director, The DO, September 3, 2010.]</ref>

==See also==
* [[Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine]]
* [[List of osteopathic colleges]]
* [[List of medical schools in the United States]]
* [[Osteopathic medicine in the United States]]

==References==
{{Reflist|2}}

==Further reading==
* <cite>Science in the Art of Osteopathy: Osteopathic Principles and Models</cite>, Caroline Stone, Nelson Thornes, 1999, paperback, 384 pages, ISBN 0-7487-3328-0
* <cite>An Osteopathic Approach to Diagnosis and Treatment </cite>, Eileen DiGiovanna, Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, 2004, hardback, 600 pages, ISBN 0-7817-4293-5
* Osteopathy in Britain. The First Hundred Years, by Martin Collins, Booksurge, 2005, paperback, 359 pages, ISBN 1-4196-0784-7




[[Category:Osteopathy]]
[[Category:Whole medical systems]]
[[Category:Alternative medical systems]]

[[ca:Osteopatia]]
[[de:Osteopathie (Alternativmedizin)]]
[[es:Osteopatía]]
[[eo:Osteopatio]]
[[fa:استخوان‌درمانی]]
[[fr:Ostéopathie]]
[[hi:अस्थिचिकित्सा]]
[[hr:Osteopatija]]
[[it:Osteopatia]]
[[he:אוסטאופתיה]]
[[mk:Остеопатска медицина]]
[[nl:Osteopathie]]
[[ja:オステオパシー]]
[[no:Osteopati]]
[[pl:Osteopatia]]
[[pt:Osteopatia]]
[[ru:Остеопатия]]
[[sq:Osteopatia]]
[[fi:Osteopatia]]
[[sv:Osteopati]]
[[tl:Osteopatiya]]
[[tr:Osteopati]]
[[zh:整骨療法]]

User:Theroofbeam

2011-07-26T19:47:04Z

Theroofbeam:

"It is (to describe it figuratively) as if an author were to make a slip of the pen, and as if this clerical error became conscious of being such. Perhaps this was no error but in a far higher sense was an essential part of the whole exposition. It is, then, as if this clerical error were to revolt against the author, out of hatred for him, were to forbid him to correct it, and were to say, "No, I will not be erased, I will stand as a witness against thee, that thou art a very poor writer."
– Søren Kierkegaard

Osteopathy

2011-07-26T19:46:22Z

Theroofbeam:

{{See also|Osteopathic manipulative medicine}}
'''Osteopathy''' and '''osteopathic medicine''' are often used inter-changeably<ref>"Osteopathy", ''Stedman's Medical Dictionary''</ref> for the paradigm of Western [[Medicine]] first proposed by [[A. T. Still]] MD, DO in 1874.
It emphasizes the interrelationship between [[Human musculoskeletal system|structure]] and [[medical condition|function]] of the [[human body|body]] and recognizes the body's ability to heal itself; it is the role of the osteopathic practitioner to facilitate that process.<ref>[http://www.aacom.org/resources/Documents/Downloads/GOT2009ed.pdf]''Glossary of Osteopathic Terminology,'' Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles (ECOP), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), Revised April 2009, p.33 &34.</ref> The [[American Osteopathic Association]] recommends using ''osteopathic physician'' and ''osteopathic medicine'' to describe [[osteopathic medicine in the United States|'American Osteopathy']], practiced by full scope of practice physicians, and using ''osteopath'' and ''osteopathy'' to describe the restricted-scope form of practice in many other jurisdictions.<ref name=style_guide>"Osteopathy should only be used when referring to the occupation of non-physician osteopaths or those trained outside of the United States." [http://www.do-online.org/index.cfm?PageID=mc_kitstyle Osteopathic Style Guide.] [[American Osteopathic Association]].</ref><ref>[http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Resolution301_A2010_FinalVersion.pdf/ House of Delegates Resolution H-301 - RE: H229-A/05 Osteopath & Osteopathy - Use of the Terms]</ref><ref>[http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/?p=26191/ Crosby J. ''Promoting DOs: Words and medium change, but message stays the same.''DO Magazine Online, September 4, 2010.]</ref> Despite this, many osteopathic physicians in the US still use the term ''osteopath''.<ref>[http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/?p=24181/ Scheirhorn, C. AOA asserts preferred terms ''osteopathic physician,'' ''osteopathic medicine,'' DO Magazine Online, August 4, 2010.]</ref>

There is an international organization for individuals, the World Osteopathic Health Organization (WOHO),<ref>[http://www.woho.org/ World Osteopathic Health Organization - World Osteopathic Health Organization]</ref> which permits membership by both 'restricted scope manual therapist' osteopaths and 'full scope of medical practice' osteopathic physicians. Similarly, there is also an international organization of organizations for national osteopathic and osteopathic medical associations, statutory regulators, and universities/medical schools offering osteopathic and osteopathic medical education, known as the Osteopathic International Alliance (OIA).<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/ Osteopathic International Alliance]</ref>

==History==
{{See also|Andrew Taylor Still#Osteopathy|l1=Andrew Taylor Still: Osteopathy}}
The practice of osteopathy began in the United States in 1874. The term "osteopathy" was coined by [[Andrew Taylor Still]], MD, DO. Still was a physician & surgeon,<ref>[http://cdm.sos.mo.gov/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/atsu&CISOPTR=693&REC=1/ ''Medical Registration for Macon County, MO as of March 27, 1874,'' Missouri Digital Heritage, Secretary of State of Missouri.]</ref><ref>[http://cdm.sos.mo.gov/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/atsu&CISOPTR=759&CISOBOX=1&REC=2/ ''Medical registration for Adair County, MO dated July 28, 1883,'' Missouri Digital Heritage, Secretary of State of Missouri.] Note: The state of Missouri did not have legislation requiring medical registration until March 27, 1874.</ref> Kansas state & territorial legislator,<ref>[http://cdm.sos.mo.gov/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/atsu&CISOPTR=685&REC=2/ ''Six Survivors of First Free State Legislature in Kansas, Topeka Daily Capital,''Missouri's Digital Heritage,Secretart of State of Missouri.]</ref> a [[Slave and free states|free state]] leader,<ref>[http://cdm.sos.mo.gov/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/atsu&CISOPTR=670&REC=1/ Charles E. Still (son) – Letters to Edith Mellor, DO. Missouri’s Digital Heritage, Secretary of State of Missouri.]</ref> and one of the founders of [[Baker University]],<ref>Autobiography of A.T. Still, A.T. Still, Kirksville, Missouri, 1908, p. 97-8.</ref> who lived near [[Baldwin City, Kansas]] at the time of the [[American Civil War]]. In Baldwin, he developed the practice of osteopathy.<ref>[http://www.lasr.net/pages/city.php?Baldwin%20City&Kansas&City_ID=KS0301001&VA=Y&Attraction_ID=KS0301001a017 Baldwin City, Kansas] "Among Free State leaders was Andrew T. Still, founder of osteopathy, whose theory of healing developed here."</ref>

Still named his new school of medicine "osteopathy," reasoning that "the bone, osteon, was the starting point from which [he] was to ascertain the cause of pathological conditions."<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.meridianinstitute.com/eamt/files/webster1/webcont.html#HOW%20I%20CAME%20TO%20ORIGINATE%20OSTEOPATHY |title=Early American Manual Therapy}}</ref> Still founded the American School of Osteopathy (now [[A.T. Still University]] of the Health Sciences) in [[Kirksville, Missouri|Kirksville]], [[Missouri]], for the teaching of osteopathy on May 10, 1892. While the state of Missouri, recognizing the equivalency of the curriculum, was willing to grant him a charter for awarding the MD degree, he remained dissatisfied with the limitations of conventional medicine and instead chose to retain the distinction of the DO degree.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://history.osteopathic.org/educate.shtml |title=Education firmly established |publisher=American Osteopathic Association}}</ref>

==Osteopathic principles==
The osteopathic medical philosophy is defined as the concept of health care that embraces the concept of the unity of the living organism’s structure (anatomy) and function (physiology). These are the four major principles of osteopathy:<ref>[http://www.aacom.org/resources/Documents/Downloads/GOT2009ed.pdf]''Glossary of Osteopathic Terminology,'' Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles (ECOP), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), Revised April 2009, p.33.</ref>

# The body is a unit. An integrated unit of mind, body, and spirit (Triune of Man - A.T. Still).
# The body possesses [[Homeostasis|self-regulatory mechanisms]], having the inherent capacity to defend, repair, and remodel itself.
# Structure and function are reciprocally inter-related.
# Rational therapy is based on consideration of the first three principles.
These principles are not held by osteopathic physicians to be [[Scientific law|empirical law]]s; they serve, rather, as the underpinnings of the osteopathic philosophy on health and disease.

==Techniques of osteopathic treatment==
{{Main|Osteopathic manipulative medicine}}
Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) is the therapeutic application of manually guided forces by an osteopathic physician (U.S. usage) to improve physiologic function and/or support homeostasis that has been altered by somatic dysfunction.<ref name="aacom.org">[http://www.aacom.org/resources/Documents/Downloads/GOT2009ed.pdf/ Glossary of Osteopathic Terminology, Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles (ECOP), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), Revised April 2009, page 28.]</ref> Somatic dysfunction is defined as impaired or altered function of related components of the somatic (body framework) system: skeletal, arthrodial and myofascial structures and their related vascular, lymphatic and neural elements. Acute somatic dysfunction is an immediate or short-term impairment or altered function of related components of the somatic(body) framework. It is characterized in early stages by vasodilation, edema, tenderness, pain and tissue contraction. It is diagnosed by history and palpatory assessment of tenderness, asymmetry of motion and relative position, restriction of motion and tissue texture change.<ref name="GOT2009ed 2009, page 53">[http://www.aacom.org/resources/Documents/Downloads/GOT2009ed.pdf/ Glossary of Osteopathic Terminology, Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles (ECOP), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), Revised April 2009, page 53.]</ref> Chronic somatic dysfunction is the impairment or altered function of related components of the somatic (body framework) system. It may be characterized by tenderness, itching, fibrosis, paresthesias and tissue contraction.<ref name="GOT2009ed 2009, page 53"/>

While there are many treatment techniques, OMT methods utilized may broadly be classified as active or passive and direct or indirect in nature.

:''Active Method:'' A technique in which the person voluntarily performs an osteopathic practitioner-directed motion.<ref name="aacom.org"/>

:''Passive Method:'' Based on techniques in which the patient refrains from voluntary muscle contraction.<ref>[http://www.aacom.org/resources/Documents/Downloads/GOT2009ed.pdf/ Glossary of Osteopathic Terminology, Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles (ECOP), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), Revised April 2009, page 34.]</ref>

:''Direct Method (D/DIR):'' An osteopathic treatment strategy by which the restrictive barrier is engaged and a final activating force is applied to correct somatic dysfunction.<ref name="GOT2009ed 2009, page 29">[http://www.aacom.org/resources/Documents/Downloads/GOT2009ed.pdf/ Glossary of Osteopathic Terminology, Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles (ECOP), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), Revised April 2009, page 29.]</ref>

:''Indirect Method (I/IND):'' A manipulative technique where the restrictive barrier is disengaged and the dysfunctional body part is moved away from the restrictive barrier until tissue tension is equal in one or all planes and directions.<ref name="GOT2009ed 2009, page 29"/>

===Scope of manual therapies===

While not a comprehensive list, OMT employs a variety of techniques including:

* [[Articulatory technique]]
* [[Balanced ligamentous tension]] (also known as balanced ligamentous tension release, ligamentous articular strain)
* [[Craniosacral Therapy]]
* [[Counterstrain]]
* [[HVLA]] (also known as High Velocity/Low Amplitude or Thrust Technique)
* Inhibitory Pressure Technique<ref name="acofp.org">[http://www.acofp.org/resources/OMT/articles/0104_2_4.html/ ''Sacrum (inhibitory pressure) Technique,'' American Osteopathic College of Family Practice]</ref>
* Mandibular Drainage Technique<ref>[http://www.acofp.org/resources/OMT/articles/1004_1_3.html/ ''Mandibular Drainage of Galbreath,'' American Osteopathic College of Family Practice]</ref>
* [[Muscle energy technique]]
* [[Myofascial Release]]
* Joint Mobilization Technique
* Soft Tissue Therapy Techniques
* PNF Technique
* Range of Motion Technique
* Visceral Manipulation

Many osteopaths also manage and/or co-manage organic or Type-O disorders and conditions, such as asthma and [[Otitis media|middle ear infection]]s in children,<ref>{{Cite journal|author=Mills M, Henley C, Barnes L, Carreiro J, Degenhardt B |title=The use of osteopathic manipulative treatment as adjuvant therapy in children with recurrent acute otitis media |journal=Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med |volume=157 |issue=9 |pages=861–6 |year=2003 |pmid=12963590 | doi = 10.1001/archpedi.157.9.861}}</ref> menstrual pain,<ref name="acofp.org"/> and pulmonary infection. A small subdivision of UK Osteopathic practitioners, following the teachings of John Martin Littlejohn and John Wernham, are known as "Classical Osteopaths". They practice a style of whole or "total" body adjustment which contends that structural strains and patterns, through effects on circulation, reflexes and sensory feedback, precede pathological tissue states. This is said to be due to the downrating, for example, of arterial microcirculation or lymphatic drainage. Treatment is said to lead to successful patient outcomes in a great number of functional and pathological disorders, including infections and degenerative conditions. Great emphasis is made of clearance of the products of metabolism, which place a load on metabolic toxin clearance mechanisms and are said to be irritative. The approach is contentious even within Osteopathy, in a similar way to Cranial Osteopathy. It is no longer taught at undergraduate level in the UK following the loss of GOSc accreditation by the Maidstone school, and is taught as a post graduate specialty.

==Research==

On February 2–4, 1975, a research symposium organized and conducted by the [[National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke]] was held at the [[National Institutes of Health]] on The Research Status of Spinal Manipulative Therapy. Papers were presented and discussed by the 116 participants. Basic scientists reviewed information about the status of research and research findings on the pathological spinal cord "nidus" fundamental to the clinical concepts on which manipulative therapy is based (i.e. chiropractic subluxation; osteopathic lesion; patho-physiological zone of neural hyper-excitability). Although focusing on the biology and therapy of back pain, there was discussion of other neuromuscular disorders and of visceral disorders in which manipulative therapy is used. The basic science studies presented were in anatomy, biochemistry, biomechanics, and neuroscience. Clinical investigators with chiropracatic, osteopathic and medical backgrounds presented papers on research findings from pathology, radiology and clinical evaluations; the latter primarily observational studies. Following this in-depth analysis of what was known at that time about spinal manipulative therapy and the principles on which it was founded, there was group discussion of what was not known and what needed to be known. Recommendations were made about research questions requiring targeted additional attention and the priority need for the establishment of research training opportunities in chiropractic and osteopathic professional schools. Basic and clinical investigators in medical schools commented that their laboratories were available for collaborative research training and research project endeavors for colleagues with chiropractic or osteopathic backgrounds.<ref>[http://nccam.nih.gov/news/events/Manual-Therapy/historical.htm/ Goldstein, Murray. The Research Status of Spinal Manipulative Therapy. DHEW Publication No. (NIH) 76-998: NINDS Monograph No. 15; 1975]</ref>

Several large studies in the UK have produced evidence that demonstrates positive clinical and cost effectiveness of manipulation in the management of lower back pain, the latest being the UK Back pain Exercise And Manipulation (UK BEAM) trial. The physical manipulation condition of the UK BEAM trial involved "... a package of techniques representative of those used by the UK chiropractic, osteopathic, and physiotherapy professions."<ref>[http://www.bmj.com/content/329/7479/1377.full.pdf/ UK Back Pain Exercise and Manipulation (UK BEAM) Trial Team. ''United Kingdom back pain exercise and manipulation (UK BEAM) randomized trial: effectiveness of physical treatments for back pain in primary care.''BMJ. 11 December 2004;329(7479):1377.]</ref><ref>[http://www.bmj.com/content/329/7479/1381.abstract/ ''United Kingdom back pain exercise and manipulation (UK BEAM) randomized trial: cost effectiveness of physical treatments for back pain in primary care.''BMJ. 11 December 2004;329(7479):1381.]</ref>

In a 2005 meta-analysis and systematic review of six randomized controlled trials of [[Osteopathic manipulative medicine|osteopathic manipulative treatment]] (OMT) that involved blinded assessments of lower back pain in ambulatory settings, it was concluded that OMT significantly reduces [[lower back pain]], and that the level of pain reduction is greater than expected from [[placebo]] effects alone and persists for at least three months.<ref>{{Cite journal|author=Licciardone JC, Brimhall AK, King LN |title=Osteopathic manipulative treatment for low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |journal=BMC Musculoskelet Disord |volume=6 |issue= |page=43 |year=2005 |pmid=16080794 |pmc=1208896 |doi=10.1186/1471-2474-6-43 |url=}}</ref>

The [NIH's [National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine]] states<ref>[http://nccam.nih.gov/health/pain/spinemanipulation.htm/ National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine]</ref> that overall, studies have shown that spinal manipulation can provide mild-to-moderate relief from low-back pain and appears to be as effective as conventional medical treatments. In 2007 guidelines, the [[American College of Physicians]] and the American Pain Society include spinal manipulation as one of several treatment options for practitioners to consider using when pain does not improve with self-care.<ref>[Chou R, Qaseem A, Snow V, et al. ''Diagnosis and treatment of low-back pain: a joint clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Pain Society.'' Annals of Internal Medicine. 2007;147(7):478-491.]</ref><ref>[http://www.annals.org/content/147/7/492.full.pdf+html/ Chou R, Huffman LH. ''Nonpharmacologic therapies for acute and chronic low-back pain: a review of the evidence for and American Pain Society/American College of Physicians clinical practice guideline.'' Annals of Internal Medicine. 2007;147(7):492-504.]</ref> Recent research into spinal manipulation for low-back pain has begun to look at the effects of different forms of manipulation, as well as treatment duration and frequency. Studies have found that spinal manipulation provides relief from low-back pain at least over the short term (i.e., up to 3 months), and that pain-relieving effects may continue for up to 1 year. Spinal manipulation is generally a safe treatment for low-back pain. Serious complications are very rare.<ref>[http://nccam.nih.gov/health/pain/D409_GTF.pdf/''Get the Facts: Spinal Manipulation for Low Back Pain,'' National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine]</ref>

==Osteopathy around the world==
The osteopathic profession has evolved into two branches, non-physician manual medicine osteopaths and full scope of medical practice osteopathic physicians. These groups are so distinct that in practice they function as separate professions. In recent years, the profession has actively attempted to enhance exchange and dialogue between them. Manual osteopaths who have graduated from a recognized college and are members of International Osteopathic Association may practice in all countries. In certain countries such as Canada and the USA they may not provide joint manipulation and diagnosis as these are regulated acts.<ref>

{{Cite journal| author = Wickless, Larry | title = The Osteopathic International Alliance: Unification of the Osteopathic Profession | publisher = Osteopathic International Alliance Steering Committee | url = http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/oia_article_triad0905.pdf | format = PDF | accessdate = 19 September 2006}}</ref>

The following sections describe the legal status of ''Osteopathy'' and ''Osteopathic Medicine'' in each country listed:

===Australia===
''Osteopaths'' are primary contact health professionals who, in their own practice, make independent judgments in the examination, diagnosis, treatment, prevention and care of conditions of the human body to the extent of their individual competence. Osteopaths work in private practice, and the majority of private health insurance providers cover treatment performed by osteopaths.<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/australia_osteopathy.pdf/ ''Osteopathy in Australia,'' Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed February 26, 2011.]</ref>

A few publicly-funded Australian universities now offer degrees in osteopathy: [[RMIT University]] (formerly The Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology),<ref>[http://rmit.edu.au/browse;ID=dqsazel66a2u;STATUS=A?QRY=osteopathy&STYPE=ENTIRE]</ref> [[Victoria University of Technology]],<ref>[http://www.vu.edu.au/courses/bachelor-of-science-clinical-sciences-hbop/]</ref><ref>[http://www.vu.edu.au/courses/master-of-health-science-osteopathy-hmos/ Master of Health Sciences - Osteopathy]</ref> [[University of Western Sydney]] (UWS) and [[Southern Cross University]].<ref>[http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/hahs/index.php/42/ School of Health & Human Sciences - Osteopathy, Southern Cross University]</ref>

The Osteopathy Board of Australia<ref>[http://www.osteopathyboard.gov.au/Codes-and-Guidelines.aspx/ Osteopathy Board of Australia Codes & Guidelines of the Profession]</ref> is part of the Australia Health Professions Regulatory Agency.<ref>[http://www.ahpra.gov.au/ Australia Health Professions Regulatory Agency]</ref>

===Canada===
The first self-identified college of Osteopathy in Canada opened in 1981. There are 7 osteopathy colleges in Canada teaching in Montreal, Quebec City, Toronto, Hamilton, Vancouver, Ottawa, Winnipeg, Calgary & Edmonton. Currently there is a testing centre for manual osteopathic practitioners in Canada. The purpose of the Canadian Manual Osteopathy Examining Board (CMOEB) is to establish and maintain uniform high standards of excellence in the manual osteopathy profession and education, primarily but not exclusively by preparing and administering to qualified applicants examinations of superior quality, whereby those legal agencies which govern the manual osteopathic practice within each province and other countries may accept, at their discretion, those individuals who have successfully completed any part of the examinations of CMOEB, and by providing test and measurement services to the manual osteopathy profession in all areas of demonstrated need, and to advance the manual osteopathy profession when in the best interests of manual osteopathy testing. Manual osteopaths who pass exams administered by Canadian Manual Osteopathy Examining Board are permitted to join [[International Osteopathic Association]] (IOA) and receive certificate of registration. Neither the CMOEB or IOA are recognized or accredited by any Canadian federal or provincial regulatory authority.<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/canada_osteopathy.pdf/ Osteopathic International Alliance Statement Regarding Non-physician Osteopaths in Canada]</ref>

The authority for licensing of US-trained osteopathic physicians lies with the provincial Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons.<ref>[http://osteopathic.ca/Osteopathic%20Practice%20in%20Canada.doc Canadian Osteopathic Practice (.doc)]</ref><ref>[http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_91m30_e.htm Ontario Medicine Act – Restricted Titles, Section 9]</ref><ref>[http://www.cpso.on.ca/policies/policies/default.aspx?ID=1654/ Ontario College of Physicians Doctor of Osteopathy Registration Policy Statement]</ref><ref>[http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/19_416_2008/ ''British Columbia Medical Practitioners Act,'' Section 40 Registration of Osteopaths]</ref><ref>[http://www.canlii.org/ab/laws/sta/m-11/20060310/whole.html/ ''Alberta Medical Profession Act,'' Sections 3 and 18]</ref><ref>[http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Acts/h07.pdf/ ''Alberta Health Professions Act,'' Schedule 21 - Use of Titles]</ref> The Ontario Medicine Act 1991 states that ''“No person other than a member (registered with the College of Physicians & Surgeons) shall use the titles “osteopath”, “physician” or “surgeon”, a variation or abbreviation or an equivalent in another language. 1991, c. 30, s. 9 (1).”'' and ''“No person other than a member shall hold himself or herself out as a person who is qualified to practise in Ontario as an osteopath, physician or surgeon or in a specialty of medicine. 1991, c. 30, s. 9 (3).”'' Membership in the College of Physicians and Surgeons requires that members are physicians trained in the full scope of medical practice.<ref>[http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_91m30_e.htm/ Ontario Medical Act of 1991.]</ref>Similar title protection laws have been enacted in Alberta<ref>[http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Acts/h07.pdf/ ''Alberta Health Professions Act,'' Schedule 21 - Use of Titles]</ref> and British Columbia.<ref>[http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/19_416_2008/ Health Professions Act, Medical Practitioners Regulation, B.C. Reg. 416/2008]</ref> The Canadian Osteopathic Association<ref>[http://www.osteopathic.ca/index.htm Canadian Osteopathic Association]</ref> has been representing osteopathic physicians in Canada for more than 80 years and has enabled near uniform licensing across Canada for US-trained osteopathic medical graduates.{{details|Osteopathic medicine in the United States|osteopathic physicians trained in the United States|}}



===European Union===
There is no universal regulatory authority for the practice of ''osteopathy'' or ''osteopathic medicine'' within the European Union; it is on a country by country basis. The [[United Kingdom|UK]]'s [[General Osteopathic Council]], a regulatory body set up under the country's [[Osteopaths Act 1993]] has issued a position paper on European regulation of osteopathy.<ref>European Public Health Alliance [http://www.epha.org/a/1673 UK GOsC Position paper on pan-European regulation]. Accessed 2nd August 2006</ref>

[[Spain]] is currently in the official recognition process; nevertheless, it has a national registry.<ref>[http://www.osteopatas.org]</ref> Recognized professionals should be listed on it.<ref>[http://www.osteopatamadrid.com/2009/01/osteopathy-in-spain_14.html ''Osteopathy in Spain'', Ma. Virginia Suarez Pereda, ''Osteopata Madrid'', 14 January 2009].Retrieved on 14 February 2009.</ref>

In [[Austria]] and [[Switzerland]], osteopathic practitioners are [[Doctors of Medicine|MDs]] or Physiotherapists who take additional courses in osteopathy after completing their [[Medical Education|medical training]] or Physical Therapy Training.

===France===

''Osteopathy'' is a governmentally recognized profession and has title protection, ''autorisation d'utiliser le titre d'osteopathe.''<ref>[http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do;jsessionid=E2C6AF0F427389ECA418BB4307239596.tpdjo08v_3?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000000227015&idArticle=&dateTexte=20090604/ Article 75, Public Health Law(2002)]</ref> The most recent decree regarding osteopathy was enacted in 2007, [http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000000462001&dateTexte= ''Décret n° 2007-435 du 25 mars 2007 relatif aux actes et aux conditions d'exercice de l'ostéopathie''].

===Germany===
Germany has both ''osteopathy'' and ''osteopathic medicine.'' There is a difference in the osteopathic education between non-physician osteopaths, physiotherapists, and medical physicians.

Physiotherapists are a recognized health profession and can achieve a degree of “Diploma in Osteopathic Therapy (D.O.T.).” Non-physician ''osteopaths'' are ''not'' medically licensed. They have an average total of 1200 hours of training, roughly half being in manual therapy and osteopathy, with no medical specialization before they attain their degree. Non-physician osteopaths in Germany officially work under the “Heilpraktiker” law. Heilpraktiker is a separate profession within the health care system. There are many schools of Osteopathy in Germany; most are moving toward national recognition although such recognition does not now exist.<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/germany_osteopathy.pdf/ ''Osteopathy in Germany,'' Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed February 26, 2011.]</ref> In [[Germany]] there are rules (at the country level) under which persons (non-[[physician]]s) may call themselves Osteopath.<ref>Verordnung einer Weiterbildungs- und Prüfungsordnung im Bereich der Osteopathie- Hessen, [http://www.rv.hessenrecht.hessen.de/jportal/portal/page/bshesprod.psml?pid=Dokumentanzeige&showdoccase=1&js_peid=Trefferliste&documentnumber=1&numberofresults=37&fromdoctodoc=yes&doc.id=jlr-OsteoWeitBiPrOHErahmen%3Ajuris-lr00&doc.part=X&doc.price=0.0&doc.hl=1 hier online]</ref>

''Osteopathic physicians'' in Germany achieve a degree of “D.O.- DAAO” or “D.O.M.”, from the DAAO and DGOM respectively. Osteopathic physicians in Germany are fully-licensed with at least 6,500 hours in medical school 6 years, at least 7,000 hours in specialty training, which is 3 to 6 years, plus at least 680 hours of training in manual medicine and osteopathy before attaining their degree. German physicians who have obtained the degree designation Dr. med., and who have completed their medical education and specialty training in areas such as general practise, orthopaedics, neurology, internal medicine, etc. can earn a Diploma in Osteopathic Medicine, either a DO-DAAO from the DAAO (German-American Academy for Osteopathy), a DOM™ from the DGOM (German Society of Osteopathic Medicine), or an MDO (Medical Doctor of Osteopathy) from the DGCO (German Society for Chirotherapy and Osteopathy) if additional educational requirements are met. The additional education includes a 320-hour program in manual medicine and an additional minimum of 380 hours in osteopathic medicine, which together makes a minimum of 700 hours. The osteopathic medicine course is limited to physicians only.<ref name="oialliance.org">[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/germany_om.pdf/ ''Osteopathic Medicine in Germany,'' Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed February 25, 2011.]</ref>

The scope of practise for a US-trained osteopathic physician in Germany is unlimited. A foreign physician may apply for licensure with the regional medical authorities, the Health Ministry, which represents the state in which the applicant intends to work. The regional state health ministry has information regarding the types of medical providers needed in that area and therefore grants work permits to licensed physicians depending on the specialty of the foreign physician.<ref name="oialliance.org"/>

===New Zealand===
The practice of ''osteopathy'' is regulated by law, under the terms of the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance [HPCA] Act 2003<ref>[http://www.moh.govt.nz/hpca/ Health Pactitioners Competence Assurance Act (HPCA) of 2003]</ref> which came into effect on 18 September 2004. Under the Act, it is a legal requirement to be registered with the Osteopathic Council of New Zealand [OCNZ],<ref>[www.osteopathiccouncil.org.nz/ Osteopathic Council of New Zealand]</ref> and to hold an annual practicing certificate issued by them, in order to practice as an osteopath. Each of the thirteen healthcare professions regulated by the HPCA Act works within the ‘Scope of Practise’ determined and published by its professional Council. Osteopaths in New Zealand are not fully licensed physicians. In New Zealand, in addition to the general scope of practice, osteopaths may also hold the Scope of Practice for Osteopaths using Western Medical Acupuncture and Related Needling Techniques.<ref>[http://online.gazette.govt.nz/MSOS118/On-Line/NZGazette.nsf/6cee7698a9bbc7cfcc256d510059ed0b/56863e2945a2e287cc25763c004d1a9b?OpenDocument The Department of Internal Affairs: New Zealand Gazette - The New Zealand Gazette]</ref>

In New Zealand a course is offered at [[Unitec New Zealand|Unitec]].<ref>{{Cite web| url = http://www.unitec.ac.nz/?C7B4901F-385F-44F0-B37B-609CE4CC0E1E| title = Master of Osteopathy courses, postgraduate study for a masters degree |accessdate = 26 January 2009| publisher = Unitec| archiveurl =| archivedate =
| quote = The Master of Osteopathy is the only New Zealand-based programme that enables you to register with the Osteopathic Council of New Zealand, and to enter practice as an osteopath in New Zealand.}}</ref> Australasian courses consist of a bachelor's degree in clinical science (Osteopathy) followed by a [[master's degree]]. Graduates of the [[Unitec New Zealand]] program are automatically eligible for registration with the OCNZ.

Osteopaths registered and licensed to practice in any of the Australian states or territories [with the exception of Western Australia] are also eligible to register in New Zealand under the mutual recognition system operating between the two countries. Graduates from programs in every other country are required to complete an assessment procedure.<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/newzealand_osteopathy.pdf/ ''Osteopathy in New Zealand,'' Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed February 26, 2011.]</ref>

The scope of practice for US-trained ''osteopathic physicians'' is unlimited on an ''exceptions'' basis. Full licensure to practice medicine is awarded on an ''exceptions'' basis following a hearing before the licensing authorities in New Zealand. Both the Medical Council of New Zealand<ref>[http://www.mcnz.org.nz/ Medical Council of New Zealand]</ref> and the Osteopathic Council of New Zealand [OCNZ]<ref>[http://www.osteopathiccouncil.org.nz/ Osteopathic Council of New Zealand]</ref> regulate osteopathic physicians in New Zealand. Currently, the country has no recognized osteopathic medical schools.<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/newzealand_om.pdf/ ''Osteopathic Medicine in New Zealand,'' Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed February 26, 2011.]</ref>

===United Kingdom===
The practise of ''osteopathy'' has a long history in the UK. The first school of osteopathy was established in London in 1917 by John Martin Littlejohn, PhD, MD, DO, a pupil of A.T. Still, who had been Dean of The Chicago College of Osteopathic Medicine. After many years of existing outside the mainstream of health care provision, the osteopathic profession in the UK was finally accorded formal recognition by Parliament in 1993 by the Osteopaths Act.<ref>[http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1993/Ukpga_19930021_en_1.htm/ Osteopaths Act 1993]</ref> This legislation now provides the profession of osteopathy the same legal framework of statutory self-regulation as other healthcare professions such as medicine and dentistry.

The [[General Osteopathic Council]] (GOsC) regulates the practise of osteopathy under the terms of the Osteopaths Act 1993. A person cannot practise unless they register with the GOsC. The General Osteopathic Council has a statutory duty to promote, develop and regulate the profession of osteopathy in the UK. It fulfils its duty to protect the interests of the public by ensuring that all osteopaths maintain high standards of safety, competence and professional conduct throughout their professional lives.
In order to be registered with the General Osteopathic Council an osteopath must hold a recognized qualification that meets the standards as set out by law in the GOsC's Standard of Practise.<ref name="osteopathy.org.uk">[http://www.osteopathy.org.uk/about_gosc/about_standards.php Standards of Osteopathic Training & Practise, General Osteopathic Council]</ref> This Act provides for “protection of title” A person who, whether expressly or implication describes himself as an osteopath, osteopathic practitioner, osteopathic physician, osteopathist, osteotherapist, or any kind of osteopath is guilty of an offence unless he is registered as an osteopath. There are currently approximately four thousand osteopaths registered in the UK.<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/uk_osteopathy.pdf/ ''Osteopathy in the United Kingdom,'' Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed February 26, 2011]</ref>

In the United Kingdom, courses in Osteopathy have recently become integrated into the university system. Instead of receiving a Diploma in Osteopathy (DO), with or without a Diploma in Naturopathy (ND), graduates now become Masters or Bachelors of Osteopathy, or Osteopathic Medicine, (BOst or MOst) or else Bachelors of Science (BSc) in Osteopathy or Osteopathic Medicine, according to the institution attended:<ref>[http://www.osteopathy.org.uk/practice/becoming-an-osteopath/training-courses/ ''General Osteopathic Council'']</ref> in this case osteopathy and osteopathic medicine ''are'' synonymous, but ''these degrees'' do ''not'' lead to prescribing rights.

The recognition of osteopathy also means that doctors can now refer patients to osteopaths for treatment with the transfer of clinical responsibility rather than simply delegating the responsibility for care, as is the case with other healthcare professionals. It may or may not be a covered benefit under the National Health Service depending on where in the UK you may live.<ref>[http://www.osteopathy.org.uk/information/nhs-private-treatment/ General Osteopathic Council, accessed 26 February 2011.]</ref>

''Osteopathic medicine'' is regulated by the [[General Osteopathic Council]] (GOsC) and the [[General Medical Council]] (GMC) under the terms of the Osteopaths Act 1993 and statement from the GMC. A person cannot practise unless they register with ''both'' the GMC and GOsC.<ref name="osteopathy.org.uk"/> There is one "cross-over" institution, the London College of Osteopathic Medicine,<ref>[http://www.lcom.org.uk/ ''London College of Osteopathic Medicine'']</ref> which teaches osteopathy only to those who are already physicians.

Foreign-trained osteopathic physicians, who are registered with the GMC and GOsC, hold both a full medical practise and osteopathic license. Each applicant will have to pass the [[Professional and Linguistic Assessment Board test]] (PLAB) and work for one supervised year in the National Health Service (NHS). Following that year, the applicants will be able to apply for full registration (unsupervised practice or private practice). If the physician is already a specialist, postgraduate training will need to be separately recognized by the [[Postgraduate Medical Education and Training Board]] (PMETB).<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/uk_om.pdf/ "Osteopathic Medicine in the United Kingdom," Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed 26 February 2011]</ref>

===United States===
{{Main|Osteopathic medicine in the United States}}
Licensure or registration of non-physician ''osteopaths'' is not permitted anywhere in the United States. There have never been non-physician osteopaths in the US. A.T. Still's American School of Osteopathy, now known as [[A.T. Still University]] of the Health Sciences, was chartered by the state of Missouri to award the MD degree.<ref>[http://history.osteopathic.org/educate.shtml]</ref>

''Osteopathic medicine'' in the United States has always meant a physician trained in and entitled to the full scope of medical practice. ''Osteopathy'' or ''osteopath'' as written in some US state and federal laws refers only to ''osteopathic medicine'' or ''osteopathic physicians,'' respectively.<ref>[http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Resolution301_A2010_FinalVersion.pdf/ ''Resolution 301, H229-A/05 Osteopath & Osteopathy – Use of the Terms,'' Approved by the AOA House of Delegates, July 2010.]</ref> With the increased internationalization of the profession, these older terms have fallen out of favor as generally accepted use due to the confusion they may cause.<ref>[http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/?p=24181/ ''AOA House reasserts preferred terms osteopathic physician, osteopathic medicine,'' Carolyn Schierhorn, The DO, August 4, 2010.]</ref><ref>[http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/?p=26191''Promoting DOs: Words, medium change, but message stays the same,'' John B. Crosby, JD - AOA Executive Director, The DO, September 3, 2010.]</ref>

==See also==
* [[Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine]]
* [[List of osteopathic colleges]]
* [[List of medical schools in the United States]]
* [[Osteopathic medicine in the United States]]

==References==
{{Reflist|2}}

==Further reading==
* <cite>Science in the Art of Osteopathy: Osteopathic Principles and Models</cite>, Caroline Stone, Nelson Thornes, 1999, paperback, 384 pages, ISBN 0-7487-3328-0
* <cite>An Osteopathic Approach to Diagnosis and Treatment </cite>, Eileen DiGiovanna, Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, 2004, hardback, 600 pages, ISBN 0-7817-4293-5
* Osteopathy in Britain. The First Hundred Years, by Martin Collins, Booksurge, 2005, paperback, 359 pages, ISBN 1-4196-0784-7




[[Category:Osteopathy]]
[[Category:Whole medical systems]]

[[ca:Osteopatia]]
[[de:Osteopathie (Alternativmedizin)]]
[[es:Osteopatía]]
[[eo:Osteopatio]]
[[fa:استخوان‌درمانی]]
[[fr:Ostéopathie]]
[[hi:अस्थिचिकित्सा]]
[[hr:Osteopatija]]
[[it:Osteopatia]]
[[he:אוסטאופתיה]]
[[mk:Остеопатска медицина]]
[[nl:Osteopathie]]
[[ja:オステオパシー]]
[[no:Osteopati]]
[[pl:Osteopatia]]
[[pt:Osteopatia]]
[[ru:Остеопатия]]
[[sq:Osteopatia]]
[[fi:Osteopatia]]
[[sv:Osteopati]]
[[tl:Osteopatiya]]
[[tr:Osteopati]]
[[zh:整骨療法]]

Talk:Osteopathy

2011-07-26T19:37:49Z

Theroofbeam:

{{talkheader}}
{{Rational Skepticism|class=Start|importance=mid|attention=yes}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}
|maxarchivesize = 70K
|counter = 2
|minthreadsleft = 7
|algo = old(90d)
|archive = Talk:Osteopathy/Archive %(counter)d
}}
{{archives|bot=MiszaBot|age=90}}

== Recent changes ==

I've undone [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Osteopathy&action=historysubmit&diff=339420596&oldid=338842178 recent changes] that expand the description of differences between osteopathy in the US and the rest of the world in the lead, and expand on controversy surrounding cranial osteopathy. These changes seemed lacking in [[WP:RS|reliable source]]s to back them up. The difference between US and international osteopathy was already clearly explained, it did not need an additional unsourced paragraph, especially not in the [[WP:LEAD|lead]] which is only supposed to be a summary of the article. Quack Watch is not a reliable source on cranial osteopathy, it's self-published. Likewise it's not possible to generalise from a single published paper on cranial osteopathy to stating how it's regarded by many osteopaths or by the scientific community, you need a source that states that. It's [[WP:OR|original research]] to draw such broad conclusions from a [[WP:PRIMARY|primary source]]. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy|talk]]) 21:57, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I am not sure that much of the current article on osteopathy stands up to scrutiny. The literature is hardly going to be resplendent with papers on osteopathy, even less so concerned with cranial. I think to attempt to suppress expression of the controversy within and without osteopathy concerning cranial osteopathy by dismissing the sources as the content is unpalatable is using procedural obfustication. Using quality control to justify censorship and give a distorted picture of the place that cranial in fact has. ([[User:Cyberdrivel|Cyberdrivel]] ([[User talk:Cyberdrivel|talk]]) 03:30, 29 January 2010 (UTC))

:Wikipedia isn't based on the [[WP:OR|opinion]] of we editors, it's based on reliable sources. That's one of its [[WP:V|founding principles]]. They don't have to be academic articles, they can be books, newspaper articles, etc. But you do need a source for statements, and you can't elaborate on the source. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy|talk]]) 19:02, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

== Osteopathy v Osteopathic medicine ==

The distinction is accepted and adopted by The American Osteopathic Association, the Osteopathic International Alliance, and the World Health Organization.

Here's the links:
*[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/oia_bylaws.pdf Osteopathic international Alliance, By-Laws]
*[http://www.osteopathic.org/index.cfm?PageID=mc_kitstyle American Osteopathic Association, Style guide]
*[http://www.osteopathy.ca/ Canadian federation of Osteopaths]

In my opinion, this article should follow these established guidelines. [[User:Hopping|Bryan Hopping]] [[User talk:Hopping|T ]] 18:43, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

:Isn't that distinction already made by having the separate articles [[Osteopathy]] and [[Osteopathic medicine in the United_States]]? [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy|talk]]) 17:58, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

::Yes, the distinction should also be made in the article. Right now, its a bit blurry. The lead even suggests the terms are "interchangeable." [[User:Hopping|Bryan Hopping]] [[User talk:Hopping|T ]] 04:57, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, the terms '''are''' interchangeable outside the USA. Both terms are used in the UK. There are nine institutions which qualify people for registration as osteopaths with the General Osteopathic Council: these include the British College of Osteopathic Medicine, earlier known as the British College of Naturopathy and Osteopathy: their main qualification has been upgraded to a Masters degree in Osteopathy (MOst) of the University of Westminster, which may be accompanied by a Diploma in Osteopathy (DO) and a Diploma in Naturopathy (ND). The Surrey Institute of Osteopathic Medicine offers a BSc (Hons) and an MOst, both in Osteopathic Medicine. The websites show that these two colleges teach similar curricula to the six colleges or schools giving degrees in Osteopathy. The ninth, the London College of Osteopathic Medicine, previously the London College of Osteopathy, has a much shorter course for those already qualified in medicine and teaches only osteopathic manipulative medicine.

This equivalence of terms in the UK was added to the [[Osteopathic Medicine]] article on 8th December 2007, only to be ripped out by Bryan Hopping and moved to the [[Osteopathy]] article, the former thereafter becoming "Osteopathic Medicine in the USA." The reference to British degrees in Osteopathic Medicine remained until 24th April 2009, when it was removed by an anonymous editor, who came back this year to vandalise the London School of Osteopathy's article.

This variation in terminology is found with many forms of alternative medicine. No distinction can be drawn between homoeopathy and homoeopathic medicine, or between ayurveda and ayurvedic medicine. The American situation is closer to that in India where practitioners ostensibly qualified in another system incorporate forms of investigation and treatment from modern medicine, in which they may or may not have also been trained, except that the American osteopaths seem to have gone all the way to scientific medicine but insist on keeping the old name. Would it not make more sense just to say that they practice "medicine?" After all, the medical school at Irvine, California, no longer claims to be osteopathic, just as that of Drexel University no longer claims to be homeopathic.

As this article is explicitly not about the USA, there is no need to adopt their idiosyncratic usage. [[User:NRPanikker|NRPanikker]] ([[User talk:NRPanikker|talk]]) 02:00, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
:I agree that these terms have a long history of interchangeable usage, but I also see that multiple international organizations have adopted by-laws that attempt to make their usages distinct. See above sources. [[User:Hopping|Bryan Hopping]] [[User talk:Hopping|T ]] 04:08, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

::Of the three references above, only the American Osteopathic Association defines "osteopathic medicine," which it says can be practiced only by people trained in the United States. The Osteopathic International Alliance is based in Chicago, was incorporated in the state of Illinois and its property reverts to the American Osteopathic Foundation. They define only "osteopath" and "osteopathic physician," and make no mention of "osteopathic medicine." The Canadian Federation of Osteopaths, founded as recently as 2005, is an affiliate of the OIA and reproduces their definitions of "osteopath" and "osteopathic physician." These are American or American-orientated organisations whose terminology should not be allowed to over-ride the usage of organisations in the rest of the world in an article explicitly about osteopathy outside the USA. [[User:NRPanikker|NRPanikker]] ([[User talk:NRPanikker|talk]]) 01:03, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

== Automatic archiving ==

{{diff|Talk:Osteopathy|370487120|357525177|I've set up an automatic archiving}} of this talk page, seeing as it was getting a bit long. Let me know if anyone objects. [[User:Gabbe|Gabbe]] ([[User talk:Gabbe|talk]]) 21:55, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

== "New Zea land"? ==

Is there any particular reason why a space appears almost everywhere New Zealand is mentioned in this article? I notice that Firefox's spell-check doesn't recognize "Zealand" and its first stock suggestion for unrecognized compound words is to split them with a space--not sure if that's somehow involved here. Given that the New Zealand article makes no mention of any alternate spellings, I think I'll go ahead and be bold and assume it was just a spell-check dictionary omission that someone acted upon (i.e. I'll change them back). --[[User:MilFlyboy|MilFlyboy]] ([[User talk:MilFlyboy|talk]]) 23:30, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
: Nevermind. I should've checked the revision history first. An anonymous user went nuts with spell-check in the last revision. I reverted it.--[[User:MilFlyboy|MilFlyboy]] ([[User talk:MilFlyboy|talk]]) 23:42, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

== POV, Fringe, Minimal, and Inferior ==

This article is POV in that Osteopathy is often viewed as somewhat fringe, of minimal efficacy, and a degree in it is typically viewed as an inferior degree to an MD. As far as I know, only an osteopathic doctor views it as on an equal footing with nonfringe medicine. This article does not mention this so is pro-Osteopathy POV (maybe I missed it, in which case it is written in an UDUEly positive POV). Reading the article as my sole information source, one would think it does not have the shady reputation it does (whether or not this reputation is justified). If this critical view is actually true in any part, that also should be in the article. [[User:PPdd|PPdd]] ([[User talk:PPdd|talk]]) 05:28, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

: [[Comparison of MD and DO in the United States]] has a more complete discussion. I would say that a DO in the United States (as opposed to the more alternative practices elsewhere) should have minimal interaction with the [[WP:FRINGE]] guideline. By my personal impression, it looks like osteopathic medical schools have somewhat lower standards than medical schools, but they have largely overcome the early unsupported claims. - [[User talk:2over0|2/0]] ([[Special:Contributions/2over0|cont.]]) 13:10, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
::I'm sure a "board certified" acupuncturist might disagree with you as to other fringe. LOL :) [[User:PPdd|PPdd]] ([[User talk:PPdd|talk]]) 20:39, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

== UNDUE ==

The section, "Osteopathy around the world" is so long it dominates the article. Instead of being ''about'' osteopathy, it reads like an attempt to promote a view of legitimacy by name dropping. [[User:PPdd|PPdd]] ([[User talk:PPdd|talk]]) 23:09, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

: Change the section name to ''Regulation'', but keep the subsections; there is probably something in the [[WP:MEDMOS|MEDMOS]] than supports this, but if nothing else the current name does not convey a proper encyclopedic tone. Make sure that we properly convey the difference between actual regulation and professional associations. Nix the single news items and run a source check for anything talking about the other kind of osteopathy. The lists of schools are probably okay for the more targeted regional articles, but are overlong here. Cut or merge most of the educational detail except where needed in discussion of the regulations. Sound about right? - [[User talk:2over0|2/0]] ([[Special:Contributions/2over0|cont.]]) 04:18, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
::My complaint is really upside down. The info on what osteopathy is UNDUEly little, not the other info is uduely too much. I still have no idea what osteopaty is beyond being people who got rejected from med school, or the rare people who had a lifelong passion to do some obscure manipulation tehcnique that they haven't even learned yet when they apply to the osteo school, so they could not know what it is they wanted to do their whole life when they were wanting to do it. It makes no sense to me, but the article sounds like what a osteo doctor said to me when I asked the difference. In instead of explaining a difference, he went into a dfensinve rant about how accredited it is, etc. [[User:PPdd|PPdd]] ([[User talk:PPdd|talk]]) 05:17, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

== Opening paragraph--definition? ==

I feel that most Wikipedia pages start with a clear explanation of the topic at the beginning. This page's opening discusses use of the word/s, what the idea is based upon, etc., but it is not clear in what osteopathy ''is''. How can this be addressed? Is it really based upon the philosophy of the interrelationship of body structure and function, or is it just that philosophy, period? —Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/38.106.151.154|38.106.151.154]] ([[User talk:38.106.151.154|talk]]) 15:09, 24 March 2011 (UTC) 

Agreed. The article is vague and woolly, and I still have no real idea what osteopathy is supposed to be. Sounds like pseudoscience, and the article comes across as propaganda. —Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/86.144.24.118|86.144.24.118]] ([[User talk:86.144.24.118|talk]]) 11:32, 17 May 2011 (UTC) 

== Alternative Medicine ==

The philosophy of osteopathic medicine falls within the evidence-based paradigm of conventional medicine. The concept of 'health' and 'wellness' are nuanced in Osteopathic Medicine to impart a specific emphasis in clinical practice.

The wikipedia page on [[Medicine]] states in regard to the legal controls for medical doctors:
"While the laws generally require medical doctors to be trained in "evidence based", Western, or [[Hippocratic]] Medicine, they are not intended to discourage different paradigms of health." — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Theroofbeam|Theroofbeam]] ([[User talk:Theroofbeam|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Theroofbeam|contribs]]) 18:52, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Osteopathy

2011-07-26T19:35:18Z

Theroofbeam: Undid revision 441585154 by Ryan Paddy (talk)

{{See also|Osteopathic manipulative medicine}}
{{Alternative medical systems}}
'''Osteopathy''' and '''osteopathic medicine''' are often used inter-changeably<ref>"Osteopathy", ''Stedman's Medical Dictionary''</ref> for the paradigm of Western [[Medicine]] first proposed by [[A. T. Still]] MD, DO in 1874.
It emphasizes the interrelationship between [[Human musculoskeletal system|structure]] and [[medical condition|function]] of the [[human body|body]] and recognizes the body's ability to heal itself; it is the role of the osteopathic practitioner to facilitate that process.<ref>[http://www.aacom.org/resources/Documents/Downloads/GOT2009ed.pdf]''Glossary of Osteopathic Terminology,'' Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles (ECOP), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), Revised April 2009, p.33 &34.</ref> The [[American Osteopathic Association]] recommends using ''osteopathic physician'' and ''osteopathic medicine'' to describe [[osteopathic medicine in the United States|'American Osteopathy']], practiced by full scope of practice physicians, and using ''osteopath'' and ''osteopathy'' to describe the restricted-scope form of practice in many other jurisdictions.<ref name=style_guide>"Osteopathy should only be used when referring to the occupation of non-physician osteopaths or those trained outside of the United States." [http://www.do-online.org/index.cfm?PageID=mc_kitstyle Osteopathic Style Guide.] [[American Osteopathic Association]].</ref><ref>[http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Resolution301_A2010_FinalVersion.pdf/ House of Delegates Resolution H-301 - RE: H229-A/05 Osteopath & Osteopathy - Use of the Terms]</ref><ref>[http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/?p=26191/ Crosby J. ''Promoting DOs: Words and medium change, but message stays the same.''DO Magazine Online, September 4, 2010.]</ref> Despite this, many osteopathic physicians in the US still use the term ''osteopath''.<ref>[http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/?p=24181/ Scheirhorn, C. AOA asserts preferred terms ''osteopathic physician,'' ''osteopathic medicine,'' DO Magazine Online, August 4, 2010.]</ref>

There is an international organization for individuals, the World Osteopathic Health Organization (WOHO),<ref>[http://www.woho.org/ World Osteopathic Health Organization - World Osteopathic Health Organization]</ref> which permits membership by both 'restricted scope manual therapist' osteopaths and 'full scope of medical practice' osteopathic physicians. Similarly, there is also an international organization of organizations for national osteopathic and osteopathic medical associations, statutory regulators, and universities/medical schools offering osteopathic and osteopathic medical education, known as the Osteopathic International Alliance (OIA).<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/ Osteopathic International Alliance]</ref>

==History==
{{See also|Andrew Taylor Still#Osteopathy|l1=Andrew Taylor Still: Osteopathy}}
The practice of osteopathy began in the United States in 1874. The term "osteopathy" was coined by [[Andrew Taylor Still]], MD, DO. Still was a physician & surgeon,<ref>[http://cdm.sos.mo.gov/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/atsu&CISOPTR=693&REC=1/ ''Medical Registration for Macon County, MO as of March 27, 1874,'' Missouri Digital Heritage, Secretary of State of Missouri.]</ref><ref>[http://cdm.sos.mo.gov/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/atsu&CISOPTR=759&CISOBOX=1&REC=2/ ''Medical registration for Adair County, MO dated July 28, 1883,'' Missouri Digital Heritage, Secretary of State of Missouri.] Note: The state of Missouri did not have legislation requiring medical registration until March 27, 1874.</ref> Kansas state & territorial legislator,<ref>[http://cdm.sos.mo.gov/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/atsu&CISOPTR=685&REC=2/ ''Six Survivors of First Free State Legislature in Kansas, Topeka Daily Capital,''Missouri's Digital Heritage,Secretart of State of Missouri.]</ref> a [[Slave and free states|free state]] leader,<ref>[http://cdm.sos.mo.gov/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/atsu&CISOPTR=670&REC=1/ Charles E. Still (son) – Letters to Edith Mellor, DO. Missouri’s Digital Heritage, Secretary of State of Missouri.]</ref> and one of the founders of [[Baker University]],<ref>Autobiography of A.T. Still, A.T. Still, Kirksville, Missouri, 1908, p. 97-8.</ref> who lived near [[Baldwin City, Kansas]] at the time of the [[American Civil War]]. In Baldwin, he developed the practice of osteopathy.<ref>[http://www.lasr.net/pages/city.php?Baldwin%20City&Kansas&City_ID=KS0301001&VA=Y&Attraction_ID=KS0301001a017 Baldwin City, Kansas] "Among Free State leaders was Andrew T. Still, founder of osteopathy, whose theory of healing developed here."</ref>

Still named his new school of medicine "osteopathy," reasoning that "the bone, osteon, was the starting point from which [he] was to ascertain the cause of pathological conditions."<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.meridianinstitute.com/eamt/files/webster1/webcont.html#HOW%20I%20CAME%20TO%20ORIGINATE%20OSTEOPATHY |title=Early American Manual Therapy}}</ref> Still founded the American School of Osteopathy (now [[A.T. Still University]] of the Health Sciences) in [[Kirksville, Missouri|Kirksville]], [[Missouri]], for the teaching of osteopathy on May 10, 1892. While the state of Missouri, recognizing the equivalency of the curriculum, was willing to grant him a charter for awarding the MD degree, he remained dissatisfied with the limitations of conventional medicine and instead chose to retain the distinction of the DO degree.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://history.osteopathic.org/educate.shtml |title=Education firmly established |publisher=American Osteopathic Association}}</ref>

==Osteopathic principles==
The osteopathic medical philosophy is defined as the concept of health care that embraces the concept of the unity of the living organism’s structure (anatomy) and function (physiology). These are the four major principles of osteopathy:<ref>[http://www.aacom.org/resources/Documents/Downloads/GOT2009ed.pdf]''Glossary of Osteopathic Terminology,'' Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles (ECOP), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), Revised April 2009, p.33.</ref>

# The body is a unit. An integrated unit of mind, body, and spirit (Triune of Man - A.T. Still).
# The body possesses [[Homeostasis|self-regulatory mechanisms]], having the inherent capacity to defend, repair, and remodel itself.
# Structure and function are reciprocally inter-related.
# Rational therapy is based on consideration of the first three principles.
These principles are not held by osteopathic physicians to be [[Scientific law|empirical law]]s; they serve, rather, as the underpinnings of the osteopathic philosophy on health and disease.

==Techniques of osteopathic treatment==
{{Main|Osteopathic manipulative medicine}}
Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) is the therapeutic application of manually guided forces by an osteopathic physician (U.S. usage) to improve physiologic function and/or support homeostasis that has been altered by somatic dysfunction.<ref name="aacom.org">[http://www.aacom.org/resources/Documents/Downloads/GOT2009ed.pdf/ Glossary of Osteopathic Terminology, Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles (ECOP), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), Revised April 2009, page 28.]</ref> Somatic dysfunction is defined as impaired or altered function of related components of the somatic (body framework) system: skeletal, arthrodial and myofascial structures and their related vascular, lymphatic and neural elements. Acute somatic dysfunction is an immediate or short-term impairment or altered function of related components of the somatic(body) framework. It is characterized in early stages by vasodilation, edema, tenderness, pain and tissue contraction. It is diagnosed by history and palpatory assessment of tenderness, asymmetry of motion and relative position, restriction of motion and tissue texture change.<ref name="GOT2009ed 2009, page 53">[http://www.aacom.org/resources/Documents/Downloads/GOT2009ed.pdf/ Glossary of Osteopathic Terminology, Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles (ECOP), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), Revised April 2009, page 53.]</ref> Chronic somatic dysfunction is the impairment or altered function of related components of the somatic (body framework) system. It may be characterized by tenderness, itching, fibrosis, paresthesias and tissue contraction.<ref name="GOT2009ed 2009, page 53"/>

While there are many treatment techniques, OMT methods utilized may broadly be classified as active or passive and direct or indirect in nature.

:''Active Method:'' A technique in which the person voluntarily performs an osteopathic practitioner-directed motion.<ref name="aacom.org"/>

:''Passive Method:'' Based on techniques in which the patient refrains from voluntary muscle contraction.<ref>[http://www.aacom.org/resources/Documents/Downloads/GOT2009ed.pdf/ Glossary of Osteopathic Terminology, Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles (ECOP), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), Revised April 2009, page 34.]</ref>

:''Direct Method (D/DIR):'' An osteopathic treatment strategy by which the restrictive barrier is engaged and a final activating force is applied to correct somatic dysfunction.<ref name="GOT2009ed 2009, page 29">[http://www.aacom.org/resources/Documents/Downloads/GOT2009ed.pdf/ Glossary of Osteopathic Terminology, Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles (ECOP), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), Revised April 2009, page 29.]</ref>

:''Indirect Method (I/IND):'' A manipulative technique where the restrictive barrier is disengaged and the dysfunctional body part is moved away from the restrictive barrier until tissue tension is equal in one or all planes and directions.<ref name="GOT2009ed 2009, page 29"/>

===Scope of manual therapies===

While not a comprehensive list, OMT employs a variety of techniques including:

* [[Articulatory technique]]
* [[Balanced ligamentous tension]] (also known as balanced ligamentous tension release, ligamentous articular strain)
* [[Craniosacral Therapy]]
* [[Counterstrain]]
* [[HVLA]] (also known as High Velocity/Low Amplitude or Thrust Technique)
* Inhibitory Pressure Technique<ref name="acofp.org">[http://www.acofp.org/resources/OMT/articles/0104_2_4.html/ ''Sacrum (inhibitory pressure) Technique,'' American Osteopathic College of Family Practice]</ref>
* Mandibular Drainage Technique<ref>[http://www.acofp.org/resources/OMT/articles/1004_1_3.html/ ''Mandibular Drainage of Galbreath,'' American Osteopathic College of Family Practice]</ref>
* [[Muscle energy technique]]
* [[Myofascial Release]]
* Joint Mobilization Technique
* Soft Tissue Therapy Techniques
* PNF Technique
* Range of Motion Technique
* Visceral Manipulation

Many osteopaths also manage and/or co-manage organic or Type-O disorders and conditions, such as asthma and [[Otitis media|middle ear infection]]s in children,<ref>{{Cite journal|author=Mills M, Henley C, Barnes L, Carreiro J, Degenhardt B |title=The use of osteopathic manipulative treatment as adjuvant therapy in children with recurrent acute otitis media |journal=Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med |volume=157 |issue=9 |pages=861–6 |year=2003 |pmid=12963590 | doi = 10.1001/archpedi.157.9.861}}</ref> menstrual pain,<ref name="acofp.org"/> and pulmonary infection. A small subdivision of UK Osteopathic practitioners, following the teachings of John Martin Littlejohn and John Wernham, are known as "Classical Osteopaths". They practice a style of whole or "total" body adjustment which contends that structural strains and patterns, through effects on circulation, reflexes and sensory feedback, precede pathological tissue states. This is said to be due to the downrating, for example, of arterial microcirculation or lymphatic drainage. Treatment is said to lead to successful patient outcomes in a great number of functional and pathological disorders, including infections and degenerative conditions. Great emphasis is made of clearance of the products of metabolism, which place a load on metabolic toxin clearance mechanisms and are said to be irritative. The approach is contentious even within Osteopathy, in a similar way to Cranial Osteopathy. It is no longer taught at undergraduate level in the UK following the loss of GOSc accreditation by the Maidstone school, and is taught as a post graduate specialty.

==Research==

On February 2–4, 1975, a research symposium organized and conducted by the [[National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke]] was held at the [[National Institutes of Health]] on The Research Status of Spinal Manipulative Therapy. Papers were presented and discussed by the 116 participants. Basic scientists reviewed information about the status of research and research findings on the pathological spinal cord "nidus" fundamental to the clinical concepts on which manipulative therapy is based (i.e. chiropractic subluxation; osteopathic lesion; patho-physiological zone of neural hyper-excitability). Although focusing on the biology and therapy of back pain, there was discussion of other neuromuscular disorders and of visceral disorders in which manipulative therapy is used. The basic science studies presented were in anatomy, biochemistry, biomechanics, and neuroscience. Clinical investigators with chiropracatic, osteopathic and medical backgrounds presented papers on research findings from pathology, radiology and clinical evaluations; the latter primarily observational studies. Following this in-depth analysis of what was known at that time about spinal manipulative therapy and the principles on which it was founded, there was group discussion of what was not known and what needed to be known. Recommendations were made about research questions requiring targeted additional attention and the priority need for the establishment of research training opportunities in chiropractic and osteopathic professional schools. Basic and clinical investigators in medical schools commented that their laboratories were available for collaborative research training and research project endeavors for colleagues with chiropractic or osteopathic backgrounds.<ref>[http://nccam.nih.gov/news/events/Manual-Therapy/historical.htm/ Goldstein, Murray. The Research Status of Spinal Manipulative Therapy. DHEW Publication No. (NIH) 76-998: NINDS Monograph No. 15; 1975]</ref>

Several large studies in the UK have produced evidence that demonstrates positive clinical and cost effectiveness of manipulation in the management of lower back pain, the latest being the UK Back pain Exercise And Manipulation (UK BEAM) trial. The physical manipulation condition of the UK BEAM trial involved "... a package of techniques representative of those used by the UK chiropractic, osteopathic, and physiotherapy professions."<ref>[http://www.bmj.com/content/329/7479/1377.full.pdf/ UK Back Pain Exercise and Manipulation (UK BEAM) Trial Team. ''United Kingdom back pain exercise and manipulation (UK BEAM) randomized trial: effectiveness of physical treatments for back pain in primary care.''BMJ. 11 December 2004;329(7479):1377.]</ref><ref>[http://www.bmj.com/content/329/7479/1381.abstract/ ''United Kingdom back pain exercise and manipulation (UK BEAM) randomized trial: cost effectiveness of physical treatments for back pain in primary care.''BMJ. 11 December 2004;329(7479):1381.]</ref>

In a 2005 meta-analysis and systematic review of six randomized controlled trials of [[Osteopathic manipulative medicine|osteopathic manipulative treatment]] (OMT) that involved blinded assessments of lower back pain in ambulatory settings, it was concluded that OMT significantly reduces [[lower back pain]], and that the level of pain reduction is greater than expected from [[placebo]] effects alone and persists for at least three months.<ref>{{Cite journal|author=Licciardone JC, Brimhall AK, King LN |title=Osteopathic manipulative treatment for low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |journal=BMC Musculoskelet Disord |volume=6 |issue= |page=43 |year=2005 |pmid=16080794 |pmc=1208896 |doi=10.1186/1471-2474-6-43 |url=}}</ref>

The [NIH's [National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine]] states<ref>[http://nccam.nih.gov/health/pain/spinemanipulation.htm/ National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine]</ref> that overall, studies have shown that spinal manipulation can provide mild-to-moderate relief from low-back pain and appears to be as effective as conventional medical treatments. In 2007 guidelines, the [[American College of Physicians]] and the American Pain Society include spinal manipulation as one of several treatment options for practitioners to consider using when pain does not improve with self-care.<ref>[Chou R, Qaseem A, Snow V, et al. ''Diagnosis and treatment of low-back pain: a joint clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Pain Society.'' Annals of Internal Medicine. 2007;147(7):478-491.]</ref><ref>[http://www.annals.org/content/147/7/492.full.pdf+html/ Chou R, Huffman LH. ''Nonpharmacologic therapies for acute and chronic low-back pain: a review of the evidence for and American Pain Society/American College of Physicians clinical practice guideline.'' Annals of Internal Medicine. 2007;147(7):492-504.]</ref> Recent research into spinal manipulation for low-back pain has begun to look at the effects of different forms of manipulation, as well as treatment duration and frequency. Studies have found that spinal manipulation provides relief from low-back pain at least over the short term (i.e., up to 3 months), and that pain-relieving effects may continue for up to 1 year. Spinal manipulation is generally a safe treatment for low-back pain. Serious complications are very rare.<ref>[http://nccam.nih.gov/health/pain/D409_GTF.pdf/''Get the Facts: Spinal Manipulation for Low Back Pain,'' National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine]</ref>

==Osteopathy around the world==
The osteopathic profession has evolved into two branches, non-physician manual medicine osteopaths and full scope of medical practice osteopathic physicians. These groups are so distinct that in practice they function as separate professions. In recent years, the profession has actively attempted to enhance exchange and dialogue between them. Manual osteopaths who have graduated from a recognized college and are members of International Osteopathic Association may practice in all countries. In certain countries such as Canada and the USA they may not provide joint manipulation and diagnosis as these are regulated acts.<ref>

{{Cite journal| author = Wickless, Larry | title = The Osteopathic International Alliance: Unification of the Osteopathic Profession | publisher = Osteopathic International Alliance Steering Committee | url = http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/oia_article_triad0905.pdf | format = PDF | accessdate = 19 September 2006}}</ref>

The following sections describe the legal status of ''Osteopathy'' and ''Osteopathic Medicine'' in each country listed:

===Australia===
''Osteopaths'' are primary contact health professionals who, in their own practice, make independent judgments in the examination, diagnosis, treatment, prevention and care of conditions of the human body to the extent of their individual competence. Osteopaths work in private practice, and the majority of private health insurance providers cover treatment performed by osteopaths.<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/australia_osteopathy.pdf/ ''Osteopathy in Australia,'' Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed February 26, 2011.]</ref>

A few publicly-funded Australian universities now offer degrees in osteopathy: [[RMIT University]] (formerly The Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology),<ref>[http://rmit.edu.au/browse;ID=dqsazel66a2u;STATUS=A?QRY=osteopathy&STYPE=ENTIRE]</ref> [[Victoria University of Technology]],<ref>[http://www.vu.edu.au/courses/bachelor-of-science-clinical-sciences-hbop/]</ref><ref>[http://www.vu.edu.au/courses/master-of-health-science-osteopathy-hmos/ Master of Health Sciences - Osteopathy]</ref> [[University of Western Sydney]] (UWS) and [[Southern Cross University]].<ref>[http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/hahs/index.php/42/ School of Health & Human Sciences - Osteopathy, Southern Cross University]</ref>

The Osteopathy Board of Australia<ref>[http://www.osteopathyboard.gov.au/Codes-and-Guidelines.aspx/ Osteopathy Board of Australia Codes & Guidelines of the Profession]</ref> is part of the Australia Health Professions Regulatory Agency.<ref>[http://www.ahpra.gov.au/ Australia Health Professions Regulatory Agency]</ref>

===Canada===
The first self-identified college of Osteopathy in Canada opened in 1981. There are 7 osteopathy colleges in Canada teaching in Montreal, Quebec City, Toronto, Hamilton, Vancouver, Ottawa, Winnipeg, Calgary & Edmonton. Currently there is a testing centre for manual osteopathic practitioners in Canada. The purpose of the Canadian Manual Osteopathy Examining Board (CMOEB) is to establish and maintain uniform high standards of excellence in the manual osteopathy profession and education, primarily but not exclusively by preparing and administering to qualified applicants examinations of superior quality, whereby those legal agencies which govern the manual osteopathic practice within each province and other countries may accept, at their discretion, those individuals who have successfully completed any part of the examinations of CMOEB, and by providing test and measurement services to the manual osteopathy profession in all areas of demonstrated need, and to advance the manual osteopathy profession when in the best interests of manual osteopathy testing. Manual osteopaths who pass exams administered by Canadian Manual Osteopathy Examining Board are permitted to join [[International Osteopathic Association]] (IOA) and receive certificate of registration. Neither the CMOEB or IOA are recognized or accredited by any Canadian federal or provincial regulatory authority.<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/canada_osteopathy.pdf/ Osteopathic International Alliance Statement Regarding Non-physician Osteopaths in Canada]</ref>

The authority for licensing of US-trained osteopathic physicians lies with the provincial Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons.<ref>[http://osteopathic.ca/Osteopathic%20Practice%20in%20Canada.doc Canadian Osteopathic Practice (.doc)]</ref><ref>[http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_91m30_e.htm Ontario Medicine Act – Restricted Titles, Section 9]</ref><ref>[http://www.cpso.on.ca/policies/policies/default.aspx?ID=1654/ Ontario College of Physicians Doctor of Osteopathy Registration Policy Statement]</ref><ref>[http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/19_416_2008/ ''British Columbia Medical Practitioners Act,'' Section 40 Registration of Osteopaths]</ref><ref>[http://www.canlii.org/ab/laws/sta/m-11/20060310/whole.html/ ''Alberta Medical Profession Act,'' Sections 3 and 18]</ref><ref>[http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Acts/h07.pdf/ ''Alberta Health Professions Act,'' Schedule 21 - Use of Titles]</ref> The Ontario Medicine Act 1991 states that ''“No person other than a member (registered with the College of Physicians & Surgeons) shall use the titles “osteopath”, “physician” or “surgeon”, a variation or abbreviation or an equivalent in another language. 1991, c. 30, s. 9 (1).”'' and ''“No person other than a member shall hold himself or herself out as a person who is qualified to practise in Ontario as an osteopath, physician or surgeon or in a specialty of medicine. 1991, c. 30, s. 9 (3).”'' Membership in the College of Physicians and Surgeons requires that members are physicians trained in the full scope of medical practice.<ref>[http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_91m30_e.htm/ Ontario Medical Act of 1991.]</ref>Similar title protection laws have been enacted in Alberta<ref>[http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Acts/h07.pdf/ ''Alberta Health Professions Act,'' Schedule 21 - Use of Titles]</ref> and British Columbia.<ref>[http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/19_416_2008/ Health Professions Act, Medical Practitioners Regulation, B.C. Reg. 416/2008]</ref> The Canadian Osteopathic Association<ref>[http://www.osteopathic.ca/index.htm Canadian Osteopathic Association]</ref> has been representing osteopathic physicians in Canada for more than 80 years and has enabled near uniform licensing across Canada for US-trained osteopathic medical graduates.{{details|Osteopathic medicine in the United States|osteopathic physicians trained in the United States|}}



===European Union===
There is no universal regulatory authority for the practice of ''osteopathy'' or ''osteopathic medicine'' within the European Union; it is on a country by country basis. The [[United Kingdom|UK]]'s [[General Osteopathic Council]], a regulatory body set up under the country's [[Osteopaths Act 1993]] has issued a position paper on European regulation of osteopathy.<ref>European Public Health Alliance [http://www.epha.org/a/1673 UK GOsC Position paper on pan-European regulation]. Accessed 2nd August 2006</ref>

[[Spain]] is currently in the official recognition process; nevertheless, it has a national registry.<ref>[http://www.osteopatas.org]</ref> Recognized professionals should be listed on it.<ref>[http://www.osteopatamadrid.com/2009/01/osteopathy-in-spain_14.html ''Osteopathy in Spain'', Ma. Virginia Suarez Pereda, ''Osteopata Madrid'', 14 January 2009].Retrieved on 14 February 2009.</ref>

In [[Austria]] and [[Switzerland]], osteopathic practitioners are [[Doctors of Medicine|MDs]] or Physiotherapists who take additional courses in osteopathy after completing their [[Medical Education|medical training]] or Physical Therapy Training.

===France===

''Osteopathy'' is a governmentally recognized profession and has title protection, ''autorisation d'utiliser le titre d'osteopathe.''<ref>[http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do;jsessionid=E2C6AF0F427389ECA418BB4307239596.tpdjo08v_3?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000000227015&idArticle=&dateTexte=20090604/ Article 75, Public Health Law(2002)]</ref> The most recent decree regarding osteopathy was enacted in 2007, [http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000000462001&dateTexte= ''Décret n° 2007-435 du 25 mars 2007 relatif aux actes et aux conditions d'exercice de l'ostéopathie''].

===Germany===
Germany has both ''osteopathy'' and ''osteopathic medicine.'' There is a difference in the osteopathic education between non-physician osteopaths, physiotherapists, and medical physicians.

Physiotherapists are a recognized health profession and can achieve a degree of “Diploma in Osteopathic Therapy (D.O.T.).” Non-physician ''osteopaths'' are ''not'' medically licensed. They have an average total of 1200 hours of training, roughly half being in manual therapy and osteopathy, with no medical specialization before they attain their degree. Non-physician osteopaths in Germany officially work under the “Heilpraktiker” law. Heilpraktiker is a separate profession within the health care system. There are many schools of Osteopathy in Germany; most are moving toward national recognition although such recognition does not now exist.<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/germany_osteopathy.pdf/ ''Osteopathy in Germany,'' Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed February 26, 2011.]</ref> In [[Germany]] there are rules (at the country level) under which persons (non-[[physician]]s) may call themselves Osteopath.<ref>Verordnung einer Weiterbildungs- und Prüfungsordnung im Bereich der Osteopathie- Hessen, [http://www.rv.hessenrecht.hessen.de/jportal/portal/page/bshesprod.psml?pid=Dokumentanzeige&showdoccase=1&js_peid=Trefferliste&documentnumber=1&numberofresults=37&fromdoctodoc=yes&doc.id=jlr-OsteoWeitBiPrOHErahmen%3Ajuris-lr00&doc.part=X&doc.price=0.0&doc.hl=1 hier online]</ref>

''Osteopathic physicians'' in Germany achieve a degree of “D.O.- DAAO” or “D.O.M.”, from the DAAO and DGOM respectively. Osteopathic physicians in Germany are fully-licensed with at least 6,500 hours in medical school 6 years, at least 7,000 hours in specialty training, which is 3 to 6 years, plus at least 680 hours of training in manual medicine and osteopathy before attaining their degree. German physicians who have obtained the degree designation Dr. med., and who have completed their medical education and specialty training in areas such as general practise, orthopaedics, neurology, internal medicine, etc. can earn a Diploma in Osteopathic Medicine, either a DO-DAAO from the DAAO (German-American Academy for Osteopathy), a DOM™ from the DGOM (German Society of Osteopathic Medicine), or an MDO (Medical Doctor of Osteopathy) from the DGCO (German Society for Chirotherapy and Osteopathy) if additional educational requirements are met. The additional education includes a 320-hour program in manual medicine and an additional minimum of 380 hours in osteopathic medicine, which together makes a minimum of 700 hours. The osteopathic medicine course is limited to physicians only.<ref name="oialliance.org">[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/germany_om.pdf/ ''Osteopathic Medicine in Germany,'' Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed February 25, 2011.]</ref>

The scope of practise for a US-trained osteopathic physician in Germany is unlimited. A foreign physician may apply for licensure with the regional medical authorities, the Health Ministry, which represents the state in which the applicant intends to work. The regional state health ministry has information regarding the types of medical providers needed in that area and therefore grants work permits to licensed physicians depending on the specialty of the foreign physician.<ref name="oialliance.org"/>

===New Zealand===
The practice of ''osteopathy'' is regulated by law, under the terms of the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance [HPCA] Act 2003<ref>[http://www.moh.govt.nz/hpca/ Health Pactitioners Competence Assurance Act (HPCA) of 2003]</ref> which came into effect on 18 September 2004. Under the Act, it is a legal requirement to be registered with the Osteopathic Council of New Zealand [OCNZ],<ref>[www.osteopathiccouncil.org.nz/ Osteopathic Council of New Zealand]</ref> and to hold an annual practicing certificate issued by them, in order to practice as an osteopath. Each of the thirteen healthcare professions regulated by the HPCA Act works within the ‘Scope of Practise’ determined and published by its professional Council. Osteopaths in New Zealand are not fully licensed physicians. In New Zealand, in addition to the general scope of practice, osteopaths may also hold the Scope of Practice for Osteopaths using Western Medical Acupuncture and Related Needling Techniques.<ref>[http://online.gazette.govt.nz/MSOS118/On-Line/NZGazette.nsf/6cee7698a9bbc7cfcc256d510059ed0b/56863e2945a2e287cc25763c004d1a9b?OpenDocument The Department of Internal Affairs: New Zealand Gazette - The New Zealand Gazette]</ref>

In New Zealand a course is offered at [[Unitec New Zealand|Unitec]].<ref>{{Cite web| url = http://www.unitec.ac.nz/?C7B4901F-385F-44F0-B37B-609CE4CC0E1E| title = Master of Osteopathy courses, postgraduate study for a masters degree |accessdate = 26 January 2009| publisher = Unitec| archiveurl =| archivedate =
| quote = The Master of Osteopathy is the only New Zealand-based programme that enables you to register with the Osteopathic Council of New Zealand, and to enter practice as an osteopath in New Zealand.}}</ref> Australasian courses consist of a bachelor's degree in clinical science (Osteopathy) followed by a [[master's degree]]. Graduates of the [[Unitec New Zealand]] program are automatically eligible for registration with the OCNZ.

Osteopaths registered and licensed to practice in any of the Australian states or territories [with the exception of Western Australia] are also eligible to register in New Zealand under the mutual recognition system operating between the two countries. Graduates from programs in every other country are required to complete an assessment procedure.<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/newzealand_osteopathy.pdf/ ''Osteopathy in New Zealand,'' Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed February 26, 2011.]</ref>

The scope of practice for US-trained ''osteopathic physicians'' is unlimited on an ''exceptions'' basis. Full licensure to practice medicine is awarded on an ''exceptions'' basis following a hearing before the licensing authorities in New Zealand. Both the Medical Council of New Zealand<ref>[http://www.mcnz.org.nz/ Medical Council of New Zealand]</ref> and the Osteopathic Council of New Zealand [OCNZ]<ref>[http://www.osteopathiccouncil.org.nz/ Osteopathic Council of New Zealand]</ref> regulate osteopathic physicians in New Zealand. Currently, the country has no recognized osteopathic medical schools.<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/newzealand_om.pdf/ ''Osteopathic Medicine in New Zealand,'' Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed February 26, 2011.]</ref>

===United Kingdom===
The practise of ''osteopathy'' has a long history in the UK. The first school of osteopathy was established in London in 1917 by John Martin Littlejohn, PhD, MD, DO, a pupil of A.T. Still, who had been Dean of The Chicago College of Osteopathic Medicine. After many years of existing outside the mainstream of health care provision, the osteopathic profession in the UK was finally accorded formal recognition by Parliament in 1993 by the Osteopaths Act.<ref>[http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1993/Ukpga_19930021_en_1.htm/ Osteopaths Act 1993]</ref> This legislation now provides the profession of osteopathy the same legal framework of statutory self-regulation as other healthcare professions such as medicine and dentistry.

The [[General Osteopathic Council]] (GOsC) regulates the practise of osteopathy under the terms of the Osteopaths Act 1993. A person cannot practise unless they register with the GOsC. The General Osteopathic Council has a statutory duty to promote, develop and regulate the profession of osteopathy in the UK. It fulfils its duty to protect the interests of the public by ensuring that all osteopaths maintain high standards of safety, competence and professional conduct throughout their professional lives.
In order to be registered with the General Osteopathic Council an osteopath must hold a recognized qualification that meets the standards as set out by law in the GOsC's Standard of Practise.<ref name="osteopathy.org.uk">[http://www.osteopathy.org.uk/about_gosc/about_standards.php Standards of Osteopathic Training & Practise, General Osteopathic Council]</ref> This Act provides for “protection of title” A person who, whether expressly or implication describes himself as an osteopath, osteopathic practitioner, osteopathic physician, osteopathist, osteotherapist, or any kind of osteopath is guilty of an offence unless he is registered as an osteopath. There are currently approximately four thousand osteopaths registered in the UK.<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/uk_osteopathy.pdf/ ''Osteopathy in the United Kingdom,'' Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed February 26, 2011]</ref>

In the United Kingdom, courses in Osteopathy have recently become integrated into the university system. Instead of receiving a Diploma in Osteopathy (DO), with or without a Diploma in Naturopathy (ND), graduates now become Masters or Bachelors of Osteopathy, or Osteopathic Medicine, (BOst or MOst) or else Bachelors of Science (BSc) in Osteopathy or Osteopathic Medicine, according to the institution attended:<ref>[http://www.osteopathy.org.uk/practice/becoming-an-osteopath/training-courses/ ''General Osteopathic Council'']</ref> in this case osteopathy and osteopathic medicine ''are'' synonymous, but ''these degrees'' do ''not'' lead to prescribing rights.

The recognition of osteopathy also means that doctors can now refer patients to osteopaths for treatment with the transfer of clinical responsibility rather than simply delegating the responsibility for care, as is the case with other healthcare professionals. It may or may not be a covered benefit under the National Health Service depending on where in the UK you may live.<ref>[http://www.osteopathy.org.uk/information/nhs-private-treatment/ General Osteopathic Council, accessed 26 February 2011.]</ref>

''Osteopathic medicine'' is regulated by the [[General Osteopathic Council]] (GOsC) and the [[General Medical Council]] (GMC) under the terms of the Osteopaths Act 1993 and statement from the GMC. A person cannot practise unless they register with ''both'' the GMC and GOsC.<ref name="osteopathy.org.uk"/> There is one "cross-over" institution, the London College of Osteopathic Medicine,<ref>[http://www.lcom.org.uk/ ''London College of Osteopathic Medicine'']</ref> which teaches osteopathy only to those who are already physicians.

Foreign-trained osteopathic physicians, who are registered with the GMC and GOsC, hold both a full medical practise and osteopathic license. Each applicant will have to pass the [[Professional and Linguistic Assessment Board test]] (PLAB) and work for one supervised year in the National Health Service (NHS). Following that year, the applicants will be able to apply for full registration (unsupervised practice or private practice). If the physician is already a specialist, postgraduate training will need to be separately recognized by the [[Postgraduate Medical Education and Training Board]] (PMETB).<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/uk_om.pdf/ "Osteopathic Medicine in the United Kingdom," Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed 26 February 2011]</ref>

===United States===
{{Main|Osteopathic medicine in the United States}}
Licensure or registration of non-physician ''osteopaths'' is not permitted anywhere in the United States. There have never been non-physician osteopaths in the US. A.T. Still's American School of Osteopathy, now known as [[A.T. Still University]] of the Health Sciences, was chartered by the state of Missouri to award the MD degree.<ref>[http://history.osteopathic.org/educate.shtml]</ref>

''Osteopathic medicine'' in the United States has always meant a physician trained in and entitled to the full scope of medical practice. ''Osteopathy'' or ''osteopath'' as written in some US state and federal laws refers only to ''osteopathic medicine'' or ''osteopathic physicians,'' respectively.<ref>[http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Resolution301_A2010_FinalVersion.pdf/ ''Resolution 301, H229-A/05 Osteopath & Osteopathy – Use of the Terms,'' Approved by the AOA House of Delegates, July 2010.]</ref> With the increased internationalization of the profession, these older terms have fallen out of favor as generally accepted use due to the confusion they may cause.<ref>[http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/?p=24181/ ''AOA House reasserts preferred terms osteopathic physician, osteopathic medicine,'' Carolyn Schierhorn, The DO, August 4, 2010.]</ref><ref>[http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/?p=26191''Promoting DOs: Words, medium change, but message stays the same,'' John B. Crosby, JD - AOA Executive Director, The DO, September 3, 2010.]</ref>

==See also==
* [[Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine]]
* [[List of osteopathic colleges]]
* [[List of medical schools in the United States]]
* [[Osteopathic medicine in the United States]]

==References==
{{Reflist|2}}

==Further reading==
* <cite>Science in the Art of Osteopathy: Osteopathic Principles and Models</cite>, Caroline Stone, Nelson Thornes, 1999, paperback, 384 pages, ISBN 0-7487-3328-0
* <cite>An Osteopathic Approach to Diagnosis and Treatment </cite>, Eileen DiGiovanna, Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, 2004, hardback, 600 pages, ISBN 0-7817-4293-5
* Osteopathy in Britain. The First Hundred Years, by Martin Collins, Booksurge, 2005, paperback, 359 pages, ISBN 1-4196-0784-7




[[Category:Osteopathy]]
[[Category:Whole medical systems]]

[[ca:Osteopatia]]
[[de:Osteopathie (Alternativmedizin)]]
[[es:Osteopatía]]
[[eo:Osteopatio]]
[[fa:استخوان‌درمانی]]
[[fr:Ostéopathie]]
[[hi:अस्थिचिकित्सा]]
[[hr:Osteopatija]]
[[it:Osteopatia]]
[[he:אוסטאופתיה]]
[[mk:Остеопатска медицина]]
[[nl:Osteopathie]]
[[ja:オステオパシー]]
[[no:Osteopati]]
[[pl:Osteopatia]]
[[pt:Osteopatia]]
[[ru:Остеопатия]]
[[sq:Osteopatia]]
[[fi:Osteopatia]]
[[sv:Osteopati]]
[[tl:Osteopatiya]]
[[tr:Osteopati]]
[[zh:整骨療法]]

User talk:Ryan Paddy

2011-07-26T19:34:36Z

Theroofbeam: /* Osteopathy */ new section

{{archive box|auto=yes}}
If you leave a message here, I'll respond here.

== RfAR ==
You are involved in a recently-filed request for arbitration. Please review the request at [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#POV tag at Israel and the apartheid analogy]] and, if you wish to do so, enter your statement and any other material you wish to submit to the Arbitration Committee. Additionally, the following resources may be of use—
* [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Requesting Arbitration]];
* [[Wikipedia:Arbitration guide]].

Thanks, – [[user:Fuzzy|Fuzzy]] – 21:49, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

==Request for MEDCAB Mediation==

The request for mediation concerning Israel and the apartheid analogy, to which you were are a party, has been accepted. Please watchlist the case page (which is where the mediation will take place). If you have any questions, please contact me.

[[User:Ronk01|Ronk01]] ([[User talk:Ronk01|talk]]) 03:06, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

:I posted a reply to your question about racial segregation vs racial discrimination and genocide. I also added a note about the ARBCOM remedy on compulsory mediation under "How do you think we can help?". [[User:Harlan wilkerson|harlan]] ([[User talk:Harlan wilkerson|talk]]) 13:25, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

== You are now a Reviewer ==

[[File:Wikipedia Reviewer.svg|right|130px]]
Hello. Your account has been granted the "<tt>reviewer<tt>" userright, allowing you to [[WP:Reviewing|review other users' edits]] on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a [[WP:Pending changes|two-month trial]] scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not [[wp:autoconfirmed|autoconfirmed]] to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only [[Special:StablePages|a small number of articles]], similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at [[Special:OldReviewedPages]].

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious [[WP:VAND|vandalism]] or [[WP:BLP|BLP violations]], and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see [[Wikipedia:Reviewing process]]). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found [[WP:Pending changes|here]].

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.  [[User:Courcelles|Courcelles]] ([[User talk:Courcelles|talk]]) 18:39, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

==Mediation: Israel and the Apartheid analogy==

Just an FYI, we are running a straw poll on title choices on the mediation page - see [[Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2010-04-14/Israel_and_the_apartheid_analogy#Straw_poll_on_titles]]. If you pitch in a vote or three, we can move this along. {{=)}} --[[User_talk:Ludwigs2|Ludwigs2]] 06:01, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

== Rollback ==

I am pleased to be able to tell you that I have granted you rollback rights. I have reviewed your editing history and am confident you will make good use of this tool. [[User:JamesBWatson|JamesBWatson]] ([[User talk:JamesBWatson|talk]]) 09:38, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

== Kolarov ==

Hi, could you please explain why you accepted [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Aleksandar_Kolarov&diff=375190461&oldid=375190274 this edit} [[User:Off2riorob|Off2riorob]] ([[User talk:Off2riorob|talk]]) 10:12, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
:Sure. My understanding of the [[Wikipedia:Reviewing|reviewing process]] is that reviewers are only supposed to reject pending changes that are obvious vandalism, BLP violations, etc. I couldn't detect that this edit was either - although perhaps if I knew more about football it might have looked like vandalism, I dunno. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 10:18, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

You should not accept things just because they are not obvious vandalism, as a reviewer you should review the desired addition as you would any edit, it was not cited was it so you revert it as uncited. You basically accepted a untrue addition to the article, please in future if you do not know if it is a correct edit do not accept it. If you accept something, go back and have a look at what you have accepted if it is cited then fine if not remove it, reviewing is not, it does not look like vandalism so I accept it, it is having a good look at it and if you support it and it is cited then accept it, you are responsible for all edits you accept. If you do not understand something then leave it for someone else to look at. Thanks. [[User:Off2riorob|Off2riorob]] ([[User talk:Off2riorob|talk]]) 10:23, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Please let me know if you need any more detailed assistance with reviewing. [[User:Off2riorob|Off2riorob]] ([[User talk:Off2riorob|talk]]) 10:25, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

:What you're saying sound sensible, but it's not what the [[Wikipedia:Reviewing|guideline on reviewing]] says. It says "You should not accept the new revision if in analyzing the diff you find [BLP violation, vandalism, etc]. ... If you find no reason not to accept the new revision, then accept it from the reviewing screen; accepting doesn't prevent you from later editing the article to address concerns you may still have." Now, following the letter of that guideline means that I ''should'' have accepted the edit because it wasn't vandalism or BLP violation. However, if I thought it was a bad edit for other reasons then after I accepted it I should then have undone it. I'd be interested to hear where your differing interpretation comes from given that pending changes is a trial process and I'm sure people are seeing it in various lights. In this instance, I would have undone the edit after accepting it had I noticed that the Manchester City connection is controversial. However, my understanding of the pending change review process (as currently written) is that it's only expected of the reviewer to accept or undo the change based on vandalism/BLP/copyright, and that going on to undo an accepted edit for other reasons is desirable but not required. That's what's implied in the wording "accepting doesn't prevent you from later editing the article to address concerns". Personally, I think this "accept and undo" process is somewhat byzantine and will hopefully be streamlined as part of the trial, but I'm doing my best to follow the guideline as actually written (not how I think it should be) to help make the trial meaningful. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 12:05, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
::That is what I have seen discussed, you are reviewing articles you know nothing about and you are accepting anything that is not vandalism..for example..John plays for Man city..and changes it the Liverpool..not really vandalism is it just false addition, so you accept it and move on.. what is good about that? the article now says he plays for another team, do you think you have done a correct thing? Do you think the wiipedia would be more correct after or before your ''reviewing'' ? [[User:Off2riorob|Off2riorob]] ([[User talk:Off2riorob|talk]]) 19:46, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
:::Let's continue this discussion at [[Wikipedia:Pending_changes/Feedback]]. As I said, I'm following the instructions for reviewing. Whether they are good instructions or not is certainly an open question but I think it's one better asked of the whole community, not as a conversation between the two of us. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 19:56, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

==Discussion on closure of Israel and Aparthied mediation==
Current consensus seems to be to move the article to '''Israel and Apartheid''' with an appropriate disambiguation line to prevent any misinterpretations. Please weigh in over the next few days. --[[User_talk:Ludwigs2|Ludwigs2]] 17:11, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
:Ryan or Ludwig: I'm wondering if it would be wise to ask a second mediator from the Mediation Cabal to join this mediation, specifically to facilitate the closure (one way or another). Ludwig: I notice you've been off WP for a couple of days. Having a relaxing beach vacation, I hope. But if you are not going to be around in the next few days, maybe we should ask a Mediation Cabal person (there are three "points of contact" listed at the top of the Cabal page) if they would mind stepping in to facilitate the closure. Even if Ludwig is around, a second opinion is always a good thing. .. kind of like an uninvolved admin coming around in an AfD. Or, Ludwig, you could just do the closure yourself, either way is fine with me. Ryan, what do you think? --[[User:Noleander|Noleander]] ([[User talk:Noleander|talk]]) 20:36, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
::Ludwigs2 will presumably be back some time soon (he probably would have let everyone know about an extended absence), and it can be sorted out then. If not, then your idea might be a way forward. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 21:28, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

== RFC re Inclusion criteria for Lists ==

Note there is a discussion at [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Inclusion criteria for Lists]] that you may wish to comment on. --[[User:Gavin.collins|Gavin Collins]] ([[User talk:Gavin.collins#top|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Gavin.collins|contribs)]] 12:57, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

== RfC Mention ==
I have mentioned you at an RfC [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/BlueRobe] regarding [[User:BlueRobe|BlueRobe]]'s behavior. Just FYI. --[[User:Torchwoodwho|Torchwood Who?]] ([[User talk:Torchwoodwho|talk]]) 14:12, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

== Thanks for the effort ==

{| style="border: 1px solid gray; background-color: #fdffe7;"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | {{#if: {{ifequal|{{{2}}}|alt}}|[[File:Barnstar of Diligence Hires.png|100px]]|[[Image:Barnstar_of_Diligence.png|100px]]}}

|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Barnstar of Diligence'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | Your efforts to improve Wikipedia - promoting accuracy and neutrality - are appreciated. [[User:Noleander|Noleander]] ([[User talk:Noleander|talk]]) 23:57, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
|}

==Revert==
What's up with [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:IPad&diff=prev&oldid=387394829 this]?--[[User:Terrillja|Terrillja]][[User Talk:Terrillja| talk]] 21:05, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
:Sorry! Looks like I must have mis-clicked while browsing too quickly through my watchlist. I didn't even read that post, or notice I had reverted it. Humble apologies. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 00:09, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

== Invitation to contribute your opinion to a stalemated edit conflict ==

Since you have been an active editor on the Talk Page of the "Israel and the Apartheid Analogy" article, I would like to invite you to contribute your opinion regarding the current stalemated discussion under the "'Reverted Contribution' continued" section. I sought a "Third Opinion" on this, but the Third Opinion editor indicated that on pages like this where there is a lot of editor discussion, the views of other editors should be solicited. To clarify just what the current stalemate is about, you can read from Para. 1.1 on in the "'Reverted Contribution' continued" section, that is, from where a Third Opinion was requested. Thank you very much for your participation.[[User:Tempered|Tempered]] ([[User talk:Tempered|talk]]) 03:07, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

== Israel and the apartheid analogy ==

You said - Introductory sentences should be concise, they shouldn't enumerate the critics, detail comes later. Also removed excessive linking, there is no need to link obvious terms like "critic" or "policy"

However what you removed is - The [State of Israel]'s treatment of the [Palestinians] has been compared by two [[United Nations Special Rapporteur]s, two [human rights group]s and [criticism of Israel|critics] of [Israeli-occupied territories|Israeli policy] to South Africa's

The reason I added the number of Rapporteurs is because there have only ever been two. On the other hand while there are a large number of human rights groups, the article's references to them is limited to two Israeli groups, and volume of criticism is relevant due to the subject of the article.

Note that the wikilinks you removed are not to general articles such as 'critic' or 'policy' as you suggested. Also, you restored the investigative descriptor of the role of the special repporteur, but United Nations does not include investigative function as such in the role descriptor in the sense it is used in other roles that do investigative work, such as law enforcement roles.

Please discuss any reverts of anything I edit with me prior to taking action. Please have a good day [[User:Koakhtzvigad|Koakhtzvigad]] ([[User talk:Koakhtzvigad|talk]]) 23:47, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

:I stand by my edits and am happy to discuss them on the article talk page, which is the approproate venue. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 01:30, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

::Please do in that case [[User:Koakhtzvigad|Koakhtzvigad]] ([[User talk:Koakhtzvigad|talk]]) 01:31, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

== Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot ==

[[User:SuggestBot|SuggestBot]] predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
{|cellspacing=10 style="background-color:transparent;"
|-
|valign=top|
;Stubs:
:[[David Jennings (bishop)]]
:[[DragonRaid]]
:[[Mu Arae e]]
:[[New Zealand Live Action Role Playing Society]]
:[[John Rice (UK Councillor)]]
:[[Planet's Edge]]
:[[Role-playing game system]]
:[[Plot point (role-playing games)]]
:[[Slough and Eton Church of England Business and Enterprise College]]
:[[Primetime Adventures]]
:[[Caverswall Road railway station]]
:[[Digital Signal 3]]
:[[Mike Pohjola]]
:[[K-type main sequence star]]
:[[Pantheon (role-playing game)]]
:[[Emblem of Afghanistan]]
:[[EverQuest Role-Playing Game]]
:[[Richard Dansky]]
:[[Sony Aath]]
|align=top|
;Cleanup
:[[Role-playing game theory]]
:[[Dungeon (video game)]]
:[[List of campaign settings]]
;Merge
:[[Online text-based role-playing game]]
:[[Azure Dreams (Game Boy Color)]]
:[[Ecliptic pole]]
;Add Sources
:[[Curious Pastimes]]
:[[List of role-playing games by name]]
:[[Role-playing game terms]]
;Wikify
:[[Loren Wiseman]]
:[[English Defence League]]
:[[Reflexive antagonism]]
;Expand
:[[Hydroelectric power in New Zealand]]
:[[WWE Money in the Bank]]
:[[Confederate States of America]]
|}

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have '''feedback''' on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on [[User_talk:SuggestBot|SuggestBot's talk page]]. Thanks from {{User0|Nettrom}}, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on [[User:SuggestBot/Requests|the SuggestBot request page]]. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- [[User:SuggestBot|SuggestBot]] ([[User talk:SuggestBot|talk]]) 15:16, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

==Let me take your temperature==
I just thought I should make this clear. My question about parapsychologists their delusions and fantasies is not meant to be malicious. It is like touching my grand daugher's forehead, and feeling warmth. Then asking "Do you have a fever? Let's take your temperature." I have genuine curiosity. I would just like to know. [[User:Kazuba|Kazuba]] ([[User talk:Kazuba|talk]]) 02:41, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
:I'm not concerned about maliciousness, just about keeping talk page discussion on the topic of practical suggestions for improvements to the article. That usually involves the provision of quotes from reliable sources, or summaries of the positions presented by reliable sources. Everything else is [[WP:OR|original research]] or just chatter around the topic, which isn't appropriate on talk pages. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 19:52, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
==A little trouble==
Recently I intended to add some material to the wikipedia that came from limited editions and a small, no longer in existence publisher. In this case "The Psychic Press." I was told I could not use material from a book published by the Psychic Press even if the same material was basically repeated in a book from a more established publisher. In fact I got the impression from this critic that nothing published by the [[Society for Psychical Research]] had any validity or a right to be on the wikipedia. Is this the way it is now? Or had I encountered an [[extremist]]? Please reply soon. [[User:Kazuba|Kazuba]] ([[User talk:Kazuba|talk]]) 03:58, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

:It depends on the context and what you're trying to use the source for. If the context is an article about parapsychology, then statements published in a parapsychology journal/book may be considered significant and worth including, even though in a more general article (e.g. one on psychology) this source may not be considered a [[WP:RS|reliable source]]. Generally speaking, it's easier to get a source such as this included as an attributed source of a statement of the opinion of the author, rather than as an unattributed source of undisputed "fact". [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 19:19, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
I don't exactly understand what you are saying. But thanks for the immediate reply. That data was the opinion of one of [[Leonora Piper]]'s many clients. Briefly the client claimed he felt that he had been manipulated by Leonora Piper and Mrs. Piper was a fraud. This seems to have been rarely recorded from the Piper readings. [[User:Kazuba|Kazuba]] ([[User talk:Kazuba|talk]]) 20:52, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

:Are you talking about [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Leonora_Piper&action=historysubmit&diff=403315299&oldid=400086145 this edit] of yours? The problem here may not just be the book you're referencing, but what you're writing about it. You can't write opinions into an article that you formed by reading a source, that's considered [[WP:OR|original research]]. You have to just write what the source itself said, straight up, without interpretation. Basically, you either summarise a source, or you quote a source, but you don't write the conclusions that you personally drew from reading a source. I haven't read the source in question so can't say whether your writing is original research, but I would say the the tone of your contribution sounds rather like original research, not like you're summarising the source. That edit was reverted by another editor because they thought it was original research, according to their comment, not so much because of an issue with the reliability of the source. They did note it was a [[WP:PRIMARY|primary source]], but that doesn't necessarily make it unusable. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 04:18, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Wow! Thanks for taking an interest in this problem. I did NOT surmise. I did NOT give my opinion. This was quoted (I can do that?) from the author A.T. Baird. I am interested in what people of the past have to say. I try to stay out of it out as a respect to the deceased. I'm pretty good at that. That is what critical historians do. Thanks again for taking an interest. I feel so lost on the wikipedia. In real life outside of the wikipedia I did historical research and editing for Paul Kurtz. He betrayed me. Martin Gardner understood and was the only one who talked to me and became my tutor. He said I taught him a lot. Randi has always given me the cold shoulder. So far other magicians never respond. I cannot read their silence. But I suspect I make others feel uncomfortable. It is breaking my heart. Did you read my user page? Did you look at the link after the statement "this came as quite a surprise" ? What am I supposed to do with all this knowledge I have collected? It delights me. Just keep my mouth shut? My wife always told me to stay away from the wikipedia. Others would just hurt me. There is a photograph here somewhere on the web of James Randi and Martin Gardner. Martin is holding and has opened Alice's Adventures in Wonderland pop-up book created by Robert Sabuda. I delighted him with that book. Once he delighted me by doing a magic effect with me over the telephone. I cannot remember if he explained it to me or not. I changed it a little bit and came up with my own presentation and I drove my therapist (female of course) crazy with that little gem. I always thought of Martin as a puzzler, magician and friend, not a skeptic. [[User:Kazuba|Kazuba]] ([[User talk:Kazuba|talk]]) 21:09, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

:If you'd like I can give some advice on how to contribute to Wikipedia. We can start with the edit I linked to above, here's the content of what you wrote:
::Some sitters by obtaining good results were fully convinced they were in communication with the deceased, while with others with whom errors predominated their reading were of the opinion Mrs. Piper was a cunning, crafty person judiciously "fishing" the the information out of the sitters, then retailing it back. They had no hestitation in proclaiming this in their reports; they stated it in very plain language. <ref>''Richard Hodgson'' by A.T. Baird, Psychic Press Limited, London, 1949, page 47, biography welcomed by The Council of the Society for Psychical Research</ref>
:Even if this is exactly what Baird wrote in his book, there are probably still some issues with this contribution. If you could fix those issues, the contribution would be less likely to be reverted by other editors. Despite what you may think, most editors on Wikipedia are willing to accept well-sourced, well-phrased contributions, even if they don't agree with the content. So I think you need to work on two things: 1) how you source your contributions, and 2) how you phrase your contributions. Getting content accepted on Wikipedia is not about who likes you, it's about the quality of your contributions.
:Let's start with attribution. A clear difference between the statements preceding yours, and your sentences, is that those preceding are attributed to someone: Martin Gardner. Where it says "Martin Gardner published two exposés...", that's the attribution. Your contribution has no attribution. Citing someone in a reference after a statement is ''not'' considered an attribution on Wikipedia. Therefore, one improvement that could be made to your contribution would be to attribute it to Baird. Your could therefore rephrase your contribution, thus:
::According to A T Baird, some sitters by obtaining good results were fully convinced they were in communication with the deceased, while with others with whom errors predominated their reading were of the opinion Mrs. Piper was a cunning, crafty person judiciously "fishing" the the information out of the sitters, then retailing it back. Baird states that the sitters had no hestitation in proclaiming this in their reports; they stated it in very plain language. <ref>''Richard Hodgson'' by A.T. Baird, Psychic Press Limited, London, 1949, page 47, biography welcomed by The Council of the Society for Psychical Research</ref>
:The difference is clear. Now instead of the information being presented as if it was "fact", it is clearly attributed to Baird as his opinion. We must ''always'' attribute statements to people or groups on Wikipedia, unless the statement is uncontroversial to most experts in the area, in which case we still need to provide a reference afterwards. For example, the article on [[evolution]] defines it as "the change over time in one or more inherited traits found in inter-breeding populations of organisms" without providing any attribution as to whose perspective this is, because it's the accepted wisdom among experts in the area, and the article simply provides a single recent textbook on evolution as the source. What's significant here is that your contribution is ''not'' of that nature. It is a statement of one person's opinion, probably a somewhat controversial opinion on a little-studied historical area, and the credentials of that person as a relatively undisputed expert presenting the most commonly accepted perspective on the subject are not clear.
:I'll stop there, and you can let me know if that makes sense to you.? If so, there's plenty more advice I can give on contributing to Wikipedia. For example, the change I suggest above is still probably not enough to get your contribution accepted on that page. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 00:29, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
I kind of dropped out of Leonora Piper. I didn't think it would raise such a fuss. Leonora Piper is a tough one. There is so much data, so much missing data and data that just does not make any sense at all. I do not think Baird is lying. He is just looking at what Piper's clients concluded. But the only way to verify that is to see and know exactly what Baird is reading. "They stated it in very plain language." William James' sister sure put it in plain language. If I remember correctly she wrote Piper was "that horrid woman." I began to accept all the Piper digging and sharing with others just wasn't worth all the rejection. It wasn't fun anymore. The subject of continuing consciousness after death is a touchy subject to some people. It is difficult for me to understand not everyone else is as curious as myself. It has gotten me in a lot of trouble. Que sera sera. Thanks for helping, Ryan. Oh and you are wrong some people just don't like me and they have stated it in very plain language. "I DO NOT LIKE YOU!" [[User:Kazuba|Kazuba]] ([[User talk:Kazuba|talk]]) 06:57, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

:I'm using your contribution to Leonora Piper as an example, but the point I'm making is a general one about the manner of your contribution. There are several problems in the way you wrote your contribution, and they are the kind of problems that will cause other editors to revert your writing (whether they like you as an editor or not). You need to write "X said Y". You need to make sure that the source you reference is a [[WP:RS|reliable source]], and you may need to go to some effort to demonstrate this to other editors on the talk page. You need to phrase your contributions so that it's clear that you're just summarising or directly quoting the source - direct quotes should be in quotation marks. And so forth. These are all points that are covered in various Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Wikipedia articles can't use your personal experiences or anecdotes or opinions, which is why people aren't likely to be interested in your stories and may consider them inappropriate distractions or self-promotion. Wikipedia is about getting across points from reliable sources in a clear, neutral manner. I'm happy to help you learn how to do that. But I think you may first need to get past this sense of persecution that you're expressing here, it's just a barrier you're creating for yourself. Wikipedia is made up of thousands of editors, and they're not all out to get you - but you WILL encounter persistent resistance and annoyance from other editors if your contributions continue to not follow the policies & guidelines. If you change your approach to editing, you may be surprised at the change in the response you'll get. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 00:33, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
I have done that before. If they don't like your stuff it does not matter. If those are the rules of the wikpedia shouldn't the reader expect you are following rules when they first read it. And if they have specific questions the reader will contact the writer before the material is deleted. Instead of first deleting the material before they contact the writer, or not contact the writer at all. Folks like to make those quick decisions. You have too much power on the tube. It is too easy to do it on the net. It is not like you are looking at each other face to face as in real life. Thanks anyway. Leonora Piper is history. And so am I at present. But I'll be back! Thanks again. Maybe when I get the information of how and when Jesus got the popular vote and officialy became God in the 4th century [[User:Kazuba|Kazuba]] ([[User talk:Kazuba|talk]]) 23:28, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

:I like the way bad edits are quickly removed on Wikipedia, it keeps the quality high. While it would be nice if every reversion was discussed with the editors involved, that's a lot to expect from volunteer editors. Wikipedia isn't about the editors and their hurt feelings, it's about the quality of the content of the articles. If you do come back to editing Wikipedia, I recommend that you try to internalise the policies and guidelines so that your posts are less likely to get reverted. You may also need to grow a thicker skin for dealing with times when you do get reverted, because it happens to everyone and it's not a bad thing. Try to focus on the content, not the personalities. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 02:35, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
I no longer take the Wikipedia seriously. I find it fun and amusing. You need to have a sense of humor. Regardless of your quality of content I charge you now and then encounter a small number of dingbats. They do exist you know. [[User:Kazuba|Kazuba]] ([[User talk:Kazuba|talk]]) 02:51, 1 March 201(UTC

Notice in the [[Dean Radin]] entry there is hardly any information on his individual experiments. You would at least expect to to see some tiny mention about his experiments on intentional chocolate, his experiments with clay dolls for remote healing and his personal claimed success at a spoon bending party. If it was known and documented wouldn't you? [[User:Kazuba|Kazuba]] ([[User talk:Kazuba|talk]]) 03:42, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

:If that content was significant and was covered in reliable sources, then it would be nice to have. Otherwise, it's best not to have it. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 20:19, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
I totally agree. It did. [[User:Kazuba|Kazuba]] ([[User talk:Kazuba|talk]]) 01:04, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

==Some of Dean Radin research includes:==

*[[Random number generator]]s and world events: Events which capture the attention of many people may affect random number generators.<ref>''The Conscious Universe: The Scientific Truth of Psychic Phenomena'' by Dean Radin, 1997 </ref> Other publications report analytical studies on how lunar cycles may affect psi and winning at one gambling casino. Winnings on slot machines rise 2% during a full-moon.<ref>''Seeking psi in the casino.'' Radin, C.I. & Rebman, J. M. (1998), Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 62 (850), 193-219</ref>

*[[Precognition|Presentiment]] experiments: Experimental tests of presentiment effects in the autonomic and central nervous system.

*[[Intention research]]: Radin's research concluded that intentionally enhanced chocolate significantly decreases stress, increases calmness, and lessens fatigue in those who eat it. [http://www.intentionalchocolate.com/content/Research.htm]<ref>Radin DI, Hayssen G, Walsh J. (2007). Effects of intentionally enhanced chocolate on mood, Explore: The Journal of Science and Healing. , Volume 3, pp. 485-492</ref> "If the Pope blessed water, everyone wants the water. But does it actually do something?" Radins asks. "The answer is yes, to a small extent."<ref> ''Mind over Chocolate'' by Alana B. Elias Kornfeld, TIME magazine, April 6, 2009, page 58</ref>

*[[Remote healing]]: Subjects constructed clay dolls of themselves. His research showed that the subjects' blood and nerve activity increases when a "healer" {{convert|100|yd}} away massaged the dolls.<ref>[http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/archives/1996/sep/14/505088006.html] The scientific edge, UNLV professor explores the link between mind and matter by Mary Manning, LAS VEGAS SUN, 14 Sep 1996.</ref>Radin also tested [[Umbanda]] mediums in Brazil, who attempted to send healing thoughts to American subjects at UNLV. These healing thoughts were not only sent to specific individuals but also ''back in time.''<ref>[http://users.lycaeum.org/~maverick/radin.htm] David Jay Brown Interviews Dean Radin </ref>

*[[Psychokinesis]]: In 2000 Radin attended a [[spoon bending]] party. To his surprise the spoon he was holding started to bend. The bowl momentarily felt like putty. Using one finger and thumb he easily pinched the end of the bowl over, nearly bending the bowl to half its length. Dean had decided in advance that the only bend he might find interesting would be of the bowl of a spoon, because to do this without tools and/or leverage is beyond the capability of most people, including himself. The silver-plated soup spoon he held bent as he had previously desired. {{Fact|date=April 2009}}<ref> See this entry's discussion page: Spoon Bending </ref>

*[[Kinesiology]]: Radin ran double-blind and triple-blind trials with 58 adults using vials of sugar and sand and a dynamometer, which measures a hand's grip strength. The results seemed to show that people's muscle strength decreased significantly when they held vials of sugar.<ref>[http://www.deanradin.com/nytimes.html] They Laughed at Galileo Too by Chip Brown, 1996 The New York Times Company
August 11, 1996, Sunday, Late Edition - Final
Section 6; Page 41; Column 2; Magazine Desk</ref>

*[[Robotics]]: Subjects attempt to manipulate a robotic arm to pick up an M & M. Unobserved, the robotic arm can complete the job in 25 steps. With a human's mental attention to the task, the job can be done in two steps.<ref name="deanradin.com">[http://www.deanradin.com/nytimes.html] They Laughed at Galileo Too by Chip Brown, 1996 The New York Times Company
August 11, 1996, Sunday, Late Edition - Final
Section 6; Page 41; Column 2; Magazine Desk </ref>

*[[Psychics]]: "The best psychic averages about 3 in 10, like the best baseball hitters .300," says Radin, "the rest of us bat about 1 or 2 in 10." <ref> The scientific edge, UNLV professor explores the link between mind and matter by Mary Manning, LAS VEGAS SUN, 14 Sep 1996, [http.//www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/archives/1996/sep/14/505088006.html]</ref> According to [[Ed May]], remote viewers in the [[Stargate Project]] were wrong 80 percent of the time and correct 20 percent of the time. Radin wrote that the probable reality of [[remote viewing]] was scientifically established by the US government's [[Stargate Project]].<ref>[http://deanradin.blogspot.com/2006/06/weird-science.html Weird Science]. A post on Radin's blog on 12 Jun 2006 </ref>

*[[Remote viewing and future machines]]: While Dean Radin was at the Conscious Research Laboratory, University of Nevada, Las Vegas he worked with remote viewer [[Joseph McMoneagle]]. Radin conceptualized a future machine that as yet did not exist. McMoneagle used his remote viewing into the future in an effort to obtain information concerning this machine to produce patentable ideas.<ref>''The Ulitimate Time Machine: A Remote Viewer's Perception of Time and Predictions for the New Millennium'' by Joseph McMoneagle, Hampton Roads, Publishing Co., Inc., 1998, p.109 </ref>

{{reflist}}

I'm not sure why you're posting this on my talk page. It's the kind of content that woul dbe bette rposted on the talk page for Dean Radin. I don't have any particular interest in the subject or know anything about the person in question. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 08:07, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

This is an example of my work that was included in the Dean Radin entry. Not the talk page. I just wanted to show you what I do. And how deep I go. I love to learn new things. (and hopefully share them) I thought my materials fullfilled the Wikipedia requirements. You see I have a slight interest in parapsycholgy and those who call themselves parapsychologists. Others did not share my interests. My materials were totally deleted sources and and all. I contend it was by persons who found my materials worthless. That's all. [[User:Kazuba|Kazuba]] ([[User talk:Kazuba|talk]]) 16:55, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

== larp page ==

if you're the acting sheriff of the larp page, what's your opinion on the latex weapon and two pictures of the quebec battles? i try to avoid to using really tall pictures like the weapon one due to formatting, and the other two are relatively low quality and resolution pictures. i have a variety of dagorhir pictures, but only dagorhir pictures, so i can't supply to the article without overloading it. is there a type of picture would be good for replacing them? specific types of larping?
[[User:Evan-Amos|Evan-Amos]] ([[User talk:Evan-Amos|talk]]) 22:33, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

:Hey there. I'm not [[WP:OWN|sheriff]], I'm just one of several editors who work on that page, although it is one I watch closely. The height of the latex weapon pic does cause minor formatting issues, but I think we should only remove it if we're replacing it with a better weapon pic. I don't think the quality or res of the other two pictures is too low (they're 600x400), and again I think they should only be removed if we have better images of the same sort of subjects (a large battle and a purpose-built venue). As you say we can't load the page up with lots of Dagorhir photos (or any other single type of larp) because that wouldn't be representative of the variety of larp out there. I'm happy that we have a Dagahir image in the history section now. It would be nice to have an image in each of the sections that don't currently have one, but they need to be relevant to the section they're in. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 01:01, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

:In my opinion, the ideal photo of a big battle might show some people fighting in the foreground, with a battle happening behind them. That way it would be clearer what's happening in the picture at the small thumb size shown on the article. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 01:04, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

::not literal sheriff, but it's easy to see people who watch over the pages and keep tabs. as for pictures, i might comb through flickr for something, though the weapons might be hard. there's also a difference between homemade weapons and the type like the store-bought latex ones. do you think one is more common than the other? i'm not sure which ones are more common, as i'm not really that knowledgeable about this community.
::[[User:Evan-Amos|Evan-Amos]] ([[User talk:Evan-Amos|talk]]) 11:50, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

:::The home-made weapons made with PVC cores are more common in the US, although I understand latex weapons (with fibreglass cores) are growing in popularity. In Europe it's the opposite, nearly all weapons in most European countries are latex, and PVC-core weapons aren't accepted in most games. And then there's Russia and Eastern Europe... where metal and wooden weapons are the norm for live roleplaying. So it's very regional. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 18:14, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

== Cabal of Mediation ==

Hello, my name is Asinthior and I will be your mediator. I have no prior knowledge of Israel and the Apartheid Analogy, which I think is a good thing as I will be able to provide a pair of fresh eyes and I won't have any prejudice on the matter. I hope we can all actively participate in the solution of this dispute. Feel free to leave a note at my talk page at any time. I will be available through the weekend. [[User:Asinthior|Asinthior]] ([[User talk:Asinthior|talk]]) 14:48, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

:Okay, thanks for volunteering. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 19:53, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

::Could we please transfer the discussion to the Mediation Cabal [[Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2011-04-17/Israel_and_the_Apartheid_Analogy#Mediator_notes|case page]]? In other words, all further comments concerning this dispute and how to insert the controversial paragraph into the [[Israel and the apartheid analogy|article]] should be done at case page until we close the case. If you agree, please state so in the discussion section of the case page. [[User:Asinthior|Asinthior]] ([[User talk:Asinthior|talk]]) 12:50, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

:::I've read the subsection of the discussion page for the article in dispute. As the Mediation Cabal did not have an immediate response, I feel the debate have moved to a new topic. I would ask all concerned parties to make a '''very short''' statement trying to define as narrowly as possible what is the topic of the dispute and what would be the expected outcome. Please do this in the discussion section of [[Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2011-04-17/Israel_and_the_Apartheid_Analogy#Mediator_notes|this]] page. [[User:Asinthior|Asinthior]] ([[User talk:Asinthior|talk]]) 15:00, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

== Friar Tuck ==

Thanks for jumping into the discussion. I found out about Friar Tuck earlier this morning at one of the reference desks and decided that is the appropriate equivalent to the "Fray" treatment. Looking forward to working with you and the other two users in solving the dispute. [[User:Asinthior|Asinthior]] ([[User talk:Asinthior|talk]]) 22:38, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

== Mediation Cabal: Israel and the Apartheid Analogy ==

It's been exactly one month since [[User:Tempered]] last contributed to WP. I think you can go ahead and do the edits you were disputing about. If he comes back and still has a problem, we can mediate then. Just throw me a line at my talk page. <big>[[User:Asinthior|Asinthior]] ([[User talk:Asinthior#top|talk]])</big> 16:20, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

:I'll think on it, see if there's any way to take his concerns into account before editing. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy#top|talk]]) 22:07, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

== Osteopathy ==

The only argument I could see for your revision was:

"Original text was more informative"

That which is accurate is informative. That which is inaccurate in not informative. I replaced an inaccurate statement for an accurate statement. If you have some special contest for this please message me before you change the definition of an entire profession.

Osteopathy

2011-07-26T19:24:44Z

Theroofbeam:

User talk:76.240.61.212

2011-07-26T19:18:53Z

Theroofbeam: ←Created page with 'Show me you argument for concluding osteopathic medicine is an "alternative medicine."'

Show me you argument for concluding osteopathic medicine is an "alternative medicine."

Osteopathy

2011-07-26T19:16:59Z

Theroofbeam:

{{See also|Osteopathic manipulative medicine}}
{{Alternative medical systems}}
'''Osteopathy''' and '''osteopathic medicine''' are often used inter-changeably<ref>"Osteopathy", ''Stedman's Medical Dictionary''</ref> for the paradigm of Western [[Medicine]] first proposed by [[A. T. Still]] MD, DO in 1874.
It emphasizes the interrelationship between [[Human musculoskeletal system|structure]] and [[medical condition|function]] of the [[human body|body]] and recognizes the body's ability to heal itself; it is the role of the osteopathic practitioner to facilitate that process.<ref>[http://www.aacom.org/resources/Documents/Downloads/GOT2009ed.pdf]''Glossary of Osteopathic Terminology,'' Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles (ECOP), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), Revised April 2009, p.33 &34.</ref> The [[American Osteopathic Association]] recommends using ''osteopathic physician'' and ''osteopathic medicine'' to describe [[osteopathic medicine in the United States|'American Osteopathy']], practiced by full scope of practice physicians, and using ''osteopath'' and ''osteopathy'' to describe the restricted-scope form of practice in many other jurisdictions.<ref name=style_guide>"Osteopathy should only be used when referring to the occupation of non-physician osteopaths or those trained outside of the United States." [http://www.do-online.org/index.cfm?PageID=mc_kitstyle Osteopathic Style Guide.] [[American Osteopathic Association]].</ref><ref>[http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Resolution301_A2010_FinalVersion.pdf/ House of Delegates Resolution H-301 - RE: H229-A/05 Osteopath & Osteopathy - Use of the Terms]</ref><ref>[http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/?p=26191/ Crosby J. ''Promoting DOs: Words and medium change, but message stays the same.''DO Magazine Online, September 4, 2010.]</ref> Despite this, many osteopathic physicians in the US still use the term ''osteopath''.<ref>[http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/?p=24181/ Scheirhorn, C. AOA asserts preferred terms ''osteopathic physician,'' ''osteopathic medicine,'' DO Magazine Online, August 4, 2010.]</ref>

There is an international organization for individuals, the World Osteopathic Health Organization (WOHO),<ref>[http://www.woho.org/ World Osteopathic Health Organization - World Osteopathic Health Organization]</ref> which permits membership by both 'restricted scope manual therapist' osteopaths and 'full scope of medical practice' osteopathic physicians. Similarly, there is also an international organization of organizations for national osteopathic and osteopathic medical associations, statutory regulators, and universities/medical schools offering osteopathic and osteopathic medical education, known as the Osteopathic International Alliance (OIA).<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/ Osteopathic International Alliance]</ref>

==History==
{{See also|Andrew Taylor Still#Osteopathy|l1=Andrew Taylor Still: Osteopathy}}
The practice of osteopathy began in the United States in 1874. The term "osteopathy" was coined by [[Andrew Taylor Still]], MD, DO. Still was a physician & surgeon,<ref>[http://cdm.sos.mo.gov/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/atsu&CISOPTR=693&REC=1/ ''Medical Registration for Macon County, MO as of March 27, 1874,'' Missouri Digital Heritage, Secretary of State of Missouri.]</ref><ref>[http://cdm.sos.mo.gov/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/atsu&CISOPTR=759&CISOBOX=1&REC=2/ ''Medical registration for Adair County, MO dated July 28, 1883,'' Missouri Digital Heritage, Secretary of State of Missouri.] Note: The state of Missouri did not have legislation requiring medical registration until March 27, 1874.</ref> Kansas state & territorial legislator,<ref>[http://cdm.sos.mo.gov/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/atsu&CISOPTR=685&REC=2/ ''Six Survivors of First Free State Legislature in Kansas, Topeka Daily Capital,''Missouri's Digital Heritage,Secretart of State of Missouri.]</ref> a [[Slave and free states|free state]] leader,<ref>[http://cdm.sos.mo.gov/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/atsu&CISOPTR=670&REC=1/ Charles E. Still (son) – Letters to Edith Mellor, DO. Missouri’s Digital Heritage, Secretary of State of Missouri.]</ref> and one of the founders of [[Baker University]],<ref>Autobiography of A.T. Still, A.T. Still, Kirksville, Missouri, 1908, p. 97-8.</ref> who lived near [[Baldwin City, Kansas]] at the time of the [[American Civil War]]. In Baldwin, he developed the practice of osteopathy.<ref>[http://www.lasr.net/pages/city.php?Baldwin%20City&Kansas&City_ID=KS0301001&VA=Y&Attraction_ID=KS0301001a017 Baldwin City, Kansas] "Among Free State leaders was Andrew T. Still, founder of osteopathy, whose theory of healing developed here."</ref>

Still named his new school of medicine "osteopathy," reasoning that "the bone, osteon, was the starting point from which [he] was to ascertain the cause of pathological conditions."<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.meridianinstitute.com/eamt/files/webster1/webcont.html#HOW%20I%20CAME%20TO%20ORIGINATE%20OSTEOPATHY |title=Early American Manual Therapy}}</ref> Still founded the American School of Osteopathy (now [[A.T. Still University]] of the Health Sciences) in [[Kirksville, Missouri|Kirksville]], [[Missouri]], for the teaching of osteopathy on May 10, 1892. While the state of Missouri, recognizing the equivalency of the curriculum, was willing to grant him a charter for awarding the MD degree, he remained dissatisfied with the limitations of conventional medicine and instead chose to retain the distinction of the DO degree.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://history.osteopathic.org/educate.shtml |title=Education firmly established |publisher=American Osteopathic Association}}</ref>

==Osteopathic principles==
The osteopathic medical philosophy is defined as the concept of health care that embraces the concept of the unity of the living organism’s structure (anatomy) and function (physiology). These are the four major principles of osteopathy:<ref>[http://www.aacom.org/resources/Documents/Downloads/GOT2009ed.pdf]''Glossary of Osteopathic Terminology,'' Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles (ECOP), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), Revised April 2009, p.33.</ref>

# The body is a unit. An integrated unit of mind, body, and spirit (Triune of Man - A.T. Still).
# The body possesses [[Homeostasis|self-regulatory mechanisms]], having the inherent capacity to defend, repair, and remodel itself.
# Structure and function are reciprocally inter-related.
# Rational therapy is based on consideration of the first three principles.
These principles are not held by osteopathic physicians to be [[Scientific law|empirical law]]s; they serve, rather, as the underpinnings of the osteopathic philosophy on health and disease.

==Techniques of osteopathic treatment==
{{Main|Osteopathic manipulative medicine}}
Osteopathic manipulative treatment (OMT) is the therapeutic application of manually guided forces by an osteopathic physician (U.S. usage) to improve physiologic function and/or support homeostasis that has been altered by somatic dysfunction.<ref name="aacom.org">[http://www.aacom.org/resources/Documents/Downloads/GOT2009ed.pdf/ Glossary of Osteopathic Terminology, Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles (ECOP), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), Revised April 2009, page 28.]</ref> Somatic dysfunction is defined as impaired or altered function of related components of the somatic (body framework) system: skeletal, arthrodial and myofascial structures and their related vascular, lymphatic and neural elements. Acute somatic dysfunction is an immediate or short-term impairment or altered function of related components of the somatic(body) framework. It is characterized in early stages by vasodilation, edema, tenderness, pain and tissue contraction. It is diagnosed by history and palpatory assessment of tenderness, asymmetry of motion and relative position, restriction of motion and tissue texture change.<ref name="GOT2009ed 2009, page 53">[http://www.aacom.org/resources/Documents/Downloads/GOT2009ed.pdf/ Glossary of Osteopathic Terminology, Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles (ECOP), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), Revised April 2009, page 53.]</ref> Chronic somatic dysfunction is the impairment or altered function of related components of the somatic (body framework) system. It may be characterized by tenderness, itching, fibrosis, paresthesias and tissue contraction.<ref name="GOT2009ed 2009, page 53"/>

While there are many treatment techniques, OMT methods utilized may broadly be classified as active or passive and direct or indirect in nature.

:''Active Method:'' A technique in which the person voluntarily performs an osteopathic practitioner-directed motion.<ref name="aacom.org"/>

:''Passive Method:'' Based on techniques in which the patient refrains from voluntary muscle contraction.<ref>[http://www.aacom.org/resources/Documents/Downloads/GOT2009ed.pdf/ Glossary of Osteopathic Terminology, Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles (ECOP), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), Revised April 2009, page 34.]</ref>

:''Direct Method (D/DIR):'' An osteopathic treatment strategy by which the restrictive barrier is engaged and a final activating force is applied to correct somatic dysfunction.<ref name="GOT2009ed 2009, page 29">[http://www.aacom.org/resources/Documents/Downloads/GOT2009ed.pdf/ Glossary of Osteopathic Terminology, Educational Council on Osteopathic Principles (ECOP), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), Revised April 2009, page 29.]</ref>

:''Indirect Method (I/IND):'' A manipulative technique where the restrictive barrier is disengaged and the dysfunctional body part is moved away from the restrictive barrier until tissue tension is equal in one or all planes and directions.<ref name="GOT2009ed 2009, page 29"/>

===Scope of manual therapies===

While not a comprehensive list, OMT employs a variety of techniques including:

* [[Articulatory technique]]
* [[Balanced ligamentous tension]] (also known as balanced ligamentous tension release, ligamentous articular strain)
* [[Craniosacral Therapy]]
* [[Counterstrain]]
* [[HVLA]] (also known as High Velocity/Low Amplitude or Thrust Technique)
* Inhibitory Pressure Technique<ref name="acofp.org">[http://www.acofp.org/resources/OMT/articles/0104_2_4.html/ ''Sacrum (inhibitory pressure) Technique,'' American Osteopathic College of Family Practice]</ref>
* Mandibular Drainage Technique<ref>[http://www.acofp.org/resources/OMT/articles/1004_1_3.html/ ''Mandibular Drainage of Galbreath,'' American Osteopathic College of Family Practice]</ref>
* [[Muscle energy technique]]
* [[Myofascial Release]]
* Joint Mobilization Technique
* Soft Tissue Therapy Techniques
* PNF Technique
* Range of Motion Technique
* Visceral Manipulation

Many osteopaths also manage and/or co-manage organic or Type-O disorders and conditions, such as asthma and [[Otitis media|middle ear infection]]s in children,<ref>{{Cite journal|author=Mills M, Henley C, Barnes L, Carreiro J, Degenhardt B |title=The use of osteopathic manipulative treatment as adjuvant therapy in children with recurrent acute otitis media |journal=Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med |volume=157 |issue=9 |pages=861–6 |year=2003 |pmid=12963590 | doi = 10.1001/archpedi.157.9.861}}</ref> menstrual pain,<ref name="acofp.org"/> and pulmonary infection. A small subdivision of UK Osteopathic practitioners, following the teachings of John Martin Littlejohn and John Wernham, are known as "Classical Osteopaths". They practice a style of whole or "total" body adjustment which contends that structural strains and patterns, through effects on circulation, reflexes and sensory feedback, precede pathological tissue states. This is said to be due to the downrating, for example, of arterial microcirculation or lymphatic drainage. Treatment is said to lead to successful patient outcomes in a great number of functional and pathological disorders, including infections and degenerative conditions. Great emphasis is made of clearance of the products of metabolism, which place a load on metabolic toxin clearance mechanisms and are said to be irritative. The approach is contentious even within Osteopathy, in a similar way to Cranial Osteopathy. It is no longer taught at undergraduate level in the UK following the loss of GOSc accreditation by the Maidstone school, and is taught as a post graduate specialty.

==Research==

On February 2–4, 1975, a research symposium organized and conducted by the [[National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke]] was held at the [[National Institutes of Health]] on The Research Status of Spinal Manipulative Therapy. Papers were presented and discussed by the 116 participants. Basic scientists reviewed information about the status of research and research findings on the pathological spinal cord "nidus" fundamental to the clinical concepts on which manipulative therapy is based (i.e. chiropractic subluxation; osteopathic lesion; patho-physiological zone of neural hyper-excitability). Although focusing on the biology and therapy of back pain, there was discussion of other neuromuscular disorders and of visceral disorders in which manipulative therapy is used. The basic science studies presented were in anatomy, biochemistry, biomechanics, and neuroscience. Clinical investigators with chiropracatic, osteopathic and medical backgrounds presented papers on research findings from pathology, radiology and clinical evaluations; the latter primarily observational studies. Following this in-depth analysis of what was known at that time about spinal manipulative therapy and the principles on which it was founded, there was group discussion of what was not known and what needed to be known. Recommendations were made about research questions requiring targeted additional attention and the priority need for the establishment of research training opportunities in chiropractic and osteopathic professional schools. Basic and clinical investigators in medical schools commented that their laboratories were available for collaborative research training and research project endeavors for colleagues with chiropractic or osteopathic backgrounds.<ref>[http://nccam.nih.gov/news/events/Manual-Therapy/historical.htm/ Goldstein, Murray. The Research Status of Spinal Manipulative Therapy. DHEW Publication No. (NIH) 76-998: NINDS Monograph No. 15; 1975]</ref>

Several large studies in the UK have produced evidence that demonstrates positive clinical and cost effectiveness of manipulation in the management of lower back pain, the latest being the UK Back pain Exercise And Manipulation (UK BEAM) trial. The physical manipulation condition of the UK BEAM trial involved "... a package of techniques representative of those used by the UK chiropractic, osteopathic, and physiotherapy professions."<ref>[http://www.bmj.com/content/329/7479/1377.full.pdf/ UK Back Pain Exercise and Manipulation (UK BEAM) Trial Team. ''United Kingdom back pain exercise and manipulation (UK BEAM) randomized trial: effectiveness of physical treatments for back pain in primary care.''BMJ. 11 December 2004;329(7479):1377.]</ref><ref>[http://www.bmj.com/content/329/7479/1381.abstract/ ''United Kingdom back pain exercise and manipulation (UK BEAM) randomized trial: cost effectiveness of physical treatments for back pain in primary care.''BMJ. 11 December 2004;329(7479):1381.]</ref>

In a 2005 meta-analysis and systematic review of six randomized controlled trials of [[Osteopathic manipulative medicine|osteopathic manipulative treatment]] (OMT) that involved blinded assessments of lower back pain in ambulatory settings, it was concluded that OMT significantly reduces [[lower back pain]], and that the level of pain reduction is greater than expected from [[placebo]] effects alone and persists for at least three months.<ref>{{Cite journal|author=Licciardone JC, Brimhall AK, King LN |title=Osteopathic manipulative treatment for low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |journal=BMC Musculoskelet Disord |volume=6 |issue= |page=43 |year=2005 |pmid=16080794 |pmc=1208896 |doi=10.1186/1471-2474-6-43 |url=}}</ref>

The [NIH's [National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine]] states<ref>[http://nccam.nih.gov/health/pain/spinemanipulation.htm/ National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine]</ref> that overall, studies have shown that spinal manipulation can provide mild-to-moderate relief from low-back pain and appears to be as effective as conventional medical treatments. In 2007 guidelines, the [[American College of Physicians]] and the American Pain Society include spinal manipulation as one of several treatment options for practitioners to consider using when pain does not improve with self-care.<ref>[Chou R, Qaseem A, Snow V, et al. ''Diagnosis and treatment of low-back pain: a joint clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Pain Society.'' Annals of Internal Medicine. 2007;147(7):478-491.]</ref><ref>[http://www.annals.org/content/147/7/492.full.pdf+html/ Chou R, Huffman LH. ''Nonpharmacologic therapies for acute and chronic low-back pain: a review of the evidence for and American Pain Society/American College of Physicians clinical practice guideline.'' Annals of Internal Medicine. 2007;147(7):492-504.]</ref> Recent research into spinal manipulation for low-back pain has begun to look at the effects of different forms of manipulation, as well as treatment duration and frequency. Studies have found that spinal manipulation provides relief from low-back pain at least over the short term (i.e., up to 3 months), and that pain-relieving effects may continue for up to 1 year. Spinal manipulation is generally a safe treatment for low-back pain. Serious complications are very rare.<ref>[http://nccam.nih.gov/health/pain/D409_GTF.pdf/''Get the Facts: Spinal Manipulation for Low Back Pain,'' National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine]</ref>

==Osteopathy around the world==
The osteopathic profession has evolved into two branches, non-physician manual medicine osteopaths and full scope of medical practice osteopathic physicians. These groups are so distinct that in practice they function as separate professions. In recent years, the profession has actively attempted to enhance exchange and dialogue between them. Manual osteopaths who have graduated from a recognized college and are members of International Osteopathic Association may practice in all countries. In certain countries such as Canada and the USA they may not provide joint manipulation and diagnosis as these are regulated acts.<ref>

{{Cite journal| author = Wickless, Larry | title = The Osteopathic International Alliance: Unification of the Osteopathic Profession | publisher = Osteopathic International Alliance Steering Committee | url = http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/oia_article_triad0905.pdf | format = PDF | accessdate = 19 September 2006}}</ref>

The following sections describe the legal status of ''Osteopathy'' and ''Osteopathic Medicine'' in each country listed:

===Australia===
''Osteopaths'' are primary contact health professionals who, in their own practice, make independent judgments in the examination, diagnosis, treatment, prevention and care of conditions of the human body to the extent of their individual competence. Osteopaths work in private practice, and the majority of private health insurance providers cover treatment performed by osteopaths.<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/australia_osteopathy.pdf/ ''Osteopathy in Australia,'' Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed February 26, 2011.]</ref>

A few publicly-funded Australian universities now offer degrees in osteopathy: [[RMIT University]] (formerly The Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology),<ref>[http://rmit.edu.au/browse;ID=dqsazel66a2u;STATUS=A?QRY=osteopathy&STYPE=ENTIRE]</ref> [[Victoria University of Technology]],<ref>[http://www.vu.edu.au/courses/bachelor-of-science-clinical-sciences-hbop/]</ref><ref>[http://www.vu.edu.au/courses/master-of-health-science-osteopathy-hmos/ Master of Health Sciences - Osteopathy]</ref> [[University of Western Sydney]] (UWS) and [[Southern Cross University]].<ref>[http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/hahs/index.php/42/ School of Health & Human Sciences - Osteopathy, Southern Cross University]</ref>

The Osteopathy Board of Australia<ref>[http://www.osteopathyboard.gov.au/Codes-and-Guidelines.aspx/ Osteopathy Board of Australia Codes & Guidelines of the Profession]</ref> is part of the Australia Health Professions Regulatory Agency.<ref>[http://www.ahpra.gov.au/ Australia Health Professions Regulatory Agency]</ref>

===Canada===
The first self-identified college of Osteopathy in Canada opened in 1981. There are 7 osteopathy colleges in Canada teaching in Montreal, Quebec City, Toronto, Hamilton, Vancouver, Ottawa, Winnipeg, Calgary & Edmonton. Currently there is a testing centre for manual osteopathic practitioners in Canada. The purpose of the Canadian Manual Osteopathy Examining Board (CMOEB) is to establish and maintain uniform high standards of excellence in the manual osteopathy profession and education, primarily but not exclusively by preparing and administering to qualified applicants examinations of superior quality, whereby those legal agencies which govern the manual osteopathic practice within each province and other countries may accept, at their discretion, those individuals who have successfully completed any part of the examinations of CMOEB, and by providing test and measurement services to the manual osteopathy profession in all areas of demonstrated need, and to advance the manual osteopathy profession when in the best interests of manual osteopathy testing. Manual osteopaths who pass exams administered by Canadian Manual Osteopathy Examining Board are permitted to join [[International Osteopathic Association]] (IOA) and receive certificate of registration. Neither the CMOEB or IOA are recognized or accredited by any Canadian federal or provincial regulatory authority.<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/canada_osteopathy.pdf/ Osteopathic International Alliance Statement Regarding Non-physician Osteopaths in Canada]</ref>

The authority for licensing of US-trained osteopathic physicians lies with the provincial Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons.<ref>[http://osteopathic.ca/Osteopathic%20Practice%20in%20Canada.doc Canadian Osteopathic Practice (.doc)]</ref><ref>[http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_91m30_e.htm Ontario Medicine Act – Restricted Titles, Section 9]</ref><ref>[http://www.cpso.on.ca/policies/policies/default.aspx?ID=1654/ Ontario College of Physicians Doctor of Osteopathy Registration Policy Statement]</ref><ref>[http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/19_416_2008/ ''British Columbia Medical Practitioners Act,'' Section 40 Registration of Osteopaths]</ref><ref>[http://www.canlii.org/ab/laws/sta/m-11/20060310/whole.html/ ''Alberta Medical Profession Act,'' Sections 3 and 18]</ref><ref>[http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Acts/h07.pdf/ ''Alberta Health Professions Act,'' Schedule 21 - Use of Titles]</ref> The Ontario Medicine Act 1991 states that ''“No person other than a member (registered with the College of Physicians & Surgeons) shall use the titles “osteopath”, “physician” or “surgeon”, a variation or abbreviation or an equivalent in another language. 1991, c. 30, s. 9 (1).”'' and ''“No person other than a member shall hold himself or herself out as a person who is qualified to practise in Ontario as an osteopath, physician or surgeon or in a specialty of medicine. 1991, c. 30, s. 9 (3).”'' Membership in the College of Physicians and Surgeons requires that members are physicians trained in the full scope of medical practice.<ref>[http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_91m30_e.htm/ Ontario Medical Act of 1991.]</ref>Similar title protection laws have been enacted in Alberta<ref>[http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Acts/h07.pdf/ ''Alberta Health Professions Act,'' Schedule 21 - Use of Titles]</ref> and British Columbia.<ref>[http://www.bclaws.ca/EPLibraries/bclaws_new/document/ID/freeside/19_416_2008/ Health Professions Act, Medical Practitioners Regulation, B.C. Reg. 416/2008]</ref> The Canadian Osteopathic Association<ref>[http://www.osteopathic.ca/index.htm Canadian Osteopathic Association]</ref> has been representing osteopathic physicians in Canada for more than 80 years and has enabled near uniform licensing across Canada for US-trained osteopathic medical graduates.{{details|Osteopathic medicine in the United States|osteopathic physicians trained in the United States|}}



===European Union===
There is no universal regulatory authority for the practice of ''osteopathy'' or ''osteopathic medicine'' within the European Union; it is on a country by country basis. The [[United Kingdom|UK]]'s [[General Osteopathic Council]], a regulatory body set up under the country's [[Osteopaths Act 1993]] has issued a position paper on European regulation of osteopathy.<ref>European Public Health Alliance [http://www.epha.org/a/1673 UK GOsC Position paper on pan-European regulation]. Accessed 2nd August 2006</ref>

[[Spain]] is currently in the official recognition process; nevertheless, it has a national registry.<ref>[http://www.osteopatas.org]</ref> Recognized professionals should be listed on it.<ref>[http://www.osteopatamadrid.com/2009/01/osteopathy-in-spain_14.html ''Osteopathy in Spain'', Ma. Virginia Suarez Pereda, ''Osteopata Madrid'', 14 January 2009].Retrieved on 14 February 2009.</ref>

In [[Austria]] and [[Switzerland]], osteopathic practitioners are [[Doctors of Medicine|MDs]] or Physiotherapists who take additional courses in osteopathy after completing their [[Medical Education|medical training]] or Physical Therapy Training.

===France===

''Osteopathy'' is a governmentally recognized profession and has title protection, ''autorisation d'utiliser le titre d'osteopathe.''<ref>[http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do;jsessionid=E2C6AF0F427389ECA418BB4307239596.tpdjo08v_3?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000000227015&idArticle=&dateTexte=20090604/ Article 75, Public Health Law(2002)]</ref> The most recent decree regarding osteopathy was enacted in 2007, [http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do?cidTexte=JORFTEXT000000462001&dateTexte= ''Décret n° 2007-435 du 25 mars 2007 relatif aux actes et aux conditions d'exercice de l'ostéopathie''].

===Germany===
Germany has both ''osteopathy'' and ''osteopathic medicine.'' There is a difference in the osteopathic education between non-physician osteopaths, physiotherapists, and medical physicians.

Physiotherapists are a recognized health profession and can achieve a degree of “Diploma in Osteopathic Therapy (D.O.T.).” Non-physician ''osteopaths'' are ''not'' medically licensed. They have an average total of 1200 hours of training, roughly half being in manual therapy and osteopathy, with no medical specialization before they attain their degree. Non-physician osteopaths in Germany officially work under the “Heilpraktiker” law. Heilpraktiker is a separate profession within the health care system. There are many schools of Osteopathy in Germany; most are moving toward national recognition although such recognition does not now exist.<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/germany_osteopathy.pdf/ ''Osteopathy in Germany,'' Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed February 26, 2011.]</ref> In [[Germany]] there are rules (at the country level) under which persons (non-[[physician]]s) may call themselves Osteopath.<ref>Verordnung einer Weiterbildungs- und Prüfungsordnung im Bereich der Osteopathie- Hessen, [http://www.rv.hessenrecht.hessen.de/jportal/portal/page/bshesprod.psml?pid=Dokumentanzeige&showdoccase=1&js_peid=Trefferliste&documentnumber=1&numberofresults=37&fromdoctodoc=yes&doc.id=jlr-OsteoWeitBiPrOHErahmen%3Ajuris-lr00&doc.part=X&doc.price=0.0&doc.hl=1 hier online]</ref>

''Osteopathic physicians'' in Germany achieve a degree of “D.O.- DAAO” or “D.O.M.”, from the DAAO and DGOM respectively. Osteopathic physicians in Germany are fully-licensed with at least 6,500 hours in medical school 6 years, at least 7,000 hours in specialty training, which is 3 to 6 years, plus at least 680 hours of training in manual medicine and osteopathy before attaining their degree. German physicians who have obtained the degree designation Dr. med., and who have completed their medical education and specialty training in areas such as general practise, orthopaedics, neurology, internal medicine, etc. can earn a Diploma in Osteopathic Medicine, either a DO-DAAO from the DAAO (German-American Academy for Osteopathy), a DOM™ from the DGOM (German Society of Osteopathic Medicine), or an MDO (Medical Doctor of Osteopathy) from the DGCO (German Society for Chirotherapy and Osteopathy) if additional educational requirements are met. The additional education includes a 320-hour program in manual medicine and an additional minimum of 380 hours in osteopathic medicine, which together makes a minimum of 700 hours. The osteopathic medicine course is limited to physicians only.<ref name="oialliance.org">[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/germany_om.pdf/ ''Osteopathic Medicine in Germany,'' Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed February 25, 2011.]</ref>

The scope of practise for a US-trained osteopathic physician in Germany is unlimited. A foreign physician may apply for licensure with the regional medical authorities, the Health Ministry, which represents the state in which the applicant intends to work. The regional state health ministry has information regarding the types of medical providers needed in that area and therefore grants work permits to licensed physicians depending on the specialty of the foreign physician.<ref name="oialliance.org"/>

===New Zealand===
The practice of ''osteopathy'' is regulated by law, under the terms of the Health Practitioners Competence Assurance [HPCA] Act 2003<ref>[http://www.moh.govt.nz/hpca/ Health Pactitioners Competence Assurance Act (HPCA) of 2003]</ref> which came into effect on 18 September 2004. Under the Act, it is a legal requirement to be registered with the Osteopathic Council of New Zealand [OCNZ],<ref>[www.osteopathiccouncil.org.nz/ Osteopathic Council of New Zealand]</ref> and to hold an annual practicing certificate issued by them, in order to practice as an osteopath. Each of the thirteen healthcare professions regulated by the HPCA Act works within the ‘Scope of Practise’ determined and published by its professional Council. Osteopaths in New Zealand are not fully licensed physicians. In New Zealand, in addition to the general scope of practice, osteopaths may also hold the Scope of Practice for Osteopaths using Western Medical Acupuncture and Related Needling Techniques.<ref>[http://online.gazette.govt.nz/MSOS118/On-Line/NZGazette.nsf/6cee7698a9bbc7cfcc256d510059ed0b/56863e2945a2e287cc25763c004d1a9b?OpenDocument The Department of Internal Affairs: New Zealand Gazette - The New Zealand Gazette]</ref>

In New Zealand a course is offered at [[Unitec New Zealand|Unitec]].<ref>{{Cite web| url = http://www.unitec.ac.nz/?C7B4901F-385F-44F0-B37B-609CE4CC0E1E| title = Master of Osteopathy courses, postgraduate study for a masters degree |accessdate = 26 January 2009| publisher = Unitec| archiveurl =| archivedate =
| quote = The Master of Osteopathy is the only New Zealand-based programme that enables you to register with the Osteopathic Council of New Zealand, and to enter practice as an osteopath in New Zealand.}}</ref> Australasian courses consist of a bachelor's degree in clinical science (Osteopathy) followed by a [[master's degree]]. Graduates of the [[Unitec New Zealand]] program are automatically eligible for registration with the OCNZ.

Osteopaths registered and licensed to practice in any of the Australian states or territories [with the exception of Western Australia] are also eligible to register in New Zealand under the mutual recognition system operating between the two countries. Graduates from programs in every other country are required to complete an assessment procedure.<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/newzealand_osteopathy.pdf/ ''Osteopathy in New Zealand,'' Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed February 26, 2011.]</ref>

The scope of practice for US-trained ''osteopathic physicians'' is unlimited on an ''exceptions'' basis. Full licensure to practice medicine is awarded on an ''exceptions'' basis following a hearing before the licensing authorities in New Zealand. Both the Medical Council of New Zealand<ref>[http://www.mcnz.org.nz/ Medical Council of New Zealand]</ref> and the Osteopathic Council of New Zealand [OCNZ]<ref>[http://www.osteopathiccouncil.org.nz/ Osteopathic Council of New Zealand]</ref> regulate osteopathic physicians in New Zealand. Currently, the country has no recognized osteopathic medical schools.<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/newzealand_om.pdf/ ''Osteopathic Medicine in New Zealand,'' Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed February 26, 2011.]</ref>

===United Kingdom===
The practise of ''osteopathy'' has a long history in the UK. The first school of osteopathy was established in London in 1917 by John Martin Littlejohn, PhD, MD, DO, a pupil of A.T. Still, who had been Dean of The Chicago College of Osteopathic Medicine. After many years of existing outside the mainstream of health care provision, the osteopathic profession in the UK was finally accorded formal recognition by Parliament in 1993 by the Osteopaths Act.<ref>[http://www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1993/Ukpga_19930021_en_1.htm/ Osteopaths Act 1993]</ref> This legislation now provides the profession of osteopathy the same legal framework of statutory self-regulation as other healthcare professions such as medicine and dentistry.

The [[General Osteopathic Council]] (GOsC) regulates the practise of osteopathy under the terms of the Osteopaths Act 1993. A person cannot practise unless they register with the GOsC. The General Osteopathic Council has a statutory duty to promote, develop and regulate the profession of osteopathy in the UK. It fulfils its duty to protect the interests of the public by ensuring that all osteopaths maintain high standards of safety, competence and professional conduct throughout their professional lives.
In order to be registered with the General Osteopathic Council an osteopath must hold a recognized qualification that meets the standards as set out by law in the GOsC's Standard of Practise.<ref name="osteopathy.org.uk">[http://www.osteopathy.org.uk/about_gosc/about_standards.php Standards of Osteopathic Training & Practise, General Osteopathic Council]</ref> This Act provides for “protection of title” A person who, whether expressly or implication describes himself as an osteopath, osteopathic practitioner, osteopathic physician, osteopathist, osteotherapist, or any kind of osteopath is guilty of an offence unless he is registered as an osteopath. There are currently approximately four thousand osteopaths registered in the UK.<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/uk_osteopathy.pdf/ ''Osteopathy in the United Kingdom,'' Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed February 26, 2011]</ref>

In the United Kingdom, courses in Osteopathy have recently become integrated into the university system. Instead of receiving a Diploma in Osteopathy (DO), with or without a Diploma in Naturopathy (ND), graduates now become Masters or Bachelors of Osteopathy, or Osteopathic Medicine, (BOst or MOst) or else Bachelors of Science (BSc) in Osteopathy or Osteopathic Medicine, according to the institution attended:<ref>[http://www.osteopathy.org.uk/practice/becoming-an-osteopath/training-courses/ ''General Osteopathic Council'']</ref> in this case osteopathy and osteopathic medicine ''are'' synonymous, but ''these degrees'' do ''not'' lead to prescribing rights.

The recognition of osteopathy also means that doctors can now refer patients to osteopaths for treatment with the transfer of clinical responsibility rather than simply delegating the responsibility for care, as is the case with other healthcare professionals. It may or may not be a covered benefit under the National Health Service depending on where in the UK you may live.<ref>[http://www.osteopathy.org.uk/information/nhs-private-treatment/ General Osteopathic Council, accessed 26 February 2011.]</ref>

''Osteopathic medicine'' is regulated by the [[General Osteopathic Council]] (GOsC) and the [[General Medical Council]] (GMC) under the terms of the Osteopaths Act 1993 and statement from the GMC. A person cannot practise unless they register with ''both'' the GMC and GOsC.<ref name="osteopathy.org.uk"/> There is one "cross-over" institution, the London College of Osteopathic Medicine,<ref>[http://www.lcom.org.uk/ ''London College of Osteopathic Medicine'']</ref> which teaches osteopathy only to those who are already physicians.

Foreign-trained osteopathic physicians, who are registered with the GMC and GOsC, hold both a full medical practise and osteopathic license. Each applicant will have to pass the [[Professional and Linguistic Assessment Board test]] (PLAB) and work for one supervised year in the National Health Service (NHS). Following that year, the applicants will be able to apply for full registration (unsupervised practice or private practice). If the physician is already a specialist, postgraduate training will need to be separately recognized by the [[Postgraduate Medical Education and Training Board]] (PMETB).<ref>[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/uk_om.pdf/ "Osteopathic Medicine in the United Kingdom," Osteopathic International Alliance, accessed 26 February 2011]</ref>

===United States===
{{Main|Osteopathic medicine in the United States}}
Licensure or registration of non-physician ''osteopaths'' is not permitted anywhere in the United States. There have never been non-physician osteopaths in the US. A.T. Still's American School of Osteopathy, now known as [[A.T. Still University]] of the Health Sciences, was chartered by the state of Missouri to award the MD degree.<ref>[http://history.osteopathic.org/educate.shtml]</ref>

''Osteopathic medicine'' in the United States has always meant a physician trained in and entitled to the full scope of medical practice. ''Osteopathy'' or ''osteopath'' as written in some US state and federal laws refers only to ''osteopathic medicine'' or ''osteopathic physicians,'' respectively.<ref>[http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Resolution301_A2010_FinalVersion.pdf/ ''Resolution 301, H229-A/05 Osteopath & Osteopathy – Use of the Terms,'' Approved by the AOA House of Delegates, July 2010.]</ref> With the increased internationalization of the profession, these older terms have fallen out of favor as generally accepted use due to the confusion they may cause.<ref>[http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/?p=24181/ ''AOA House reasserts preferred terms osteopathic physician, osteopathic medicine,'' Carolyn Schierhorn, The DO, August 4, 2010.]</ref><ref>[http://www.do-online.org/TheDO/?p=26191''Promoting DOs: Words, medium change, but message stays the same,'' John B. Crosby, JD - AOA Executive Director, The DO, September 3, 2010.]</ref>

==See also==
* [[Doctor of Osteopathic Medicine]]
* [[List of osteopathic colleges]]
* [[List of medical schools in the United States]]
* [[Osteopathic medicine in the United States]]

==References==
{{Reflist|2}}

==Further reading==
* <cite>Science in the Art of Osteopathy: Osteopathic Principles and Models</cite>, Caroline Stone, Nelson Thornes, 1999, paperback, 384 pages, ISBN 0-7487-3328-0
* <cite>An Osteopathic Approach to Diagnosis and Treatment </cite>, Eileen DiGiovanna, Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, 2004, hardback, 600 pages, ISBN 0-7817-4293-5
* Osteopathy in Britain. The First Hundred Years, by Martin Collins, Booksurge, 2005, paperback, 359 pages, ISBN 1-4196-0784-7




[[Category:Osteopathy]]
[[Category:Whole medical systems]]
[[Category:Alternative medical systems]]

[[ca:Osteopatia]]
[[de:Osteopathie (Alternativmedizin)]]
[[es:Osteopatía]]
[[eo:Osteopatio]]
[[fa:استخوان‌درمانی]]
[[fr:Ostéopathie]]
[[hi:अस्थिचिकित्सा]]
[[hr:Osteopatija]]
[[it:Osteopatia]]
[[he:אוסטאופתיה]]
[[mk:Остеопатска медицина]]
[[nl:Osteopathie]]
[[ja:オステオパシー]]
[[no:Osteopati]]
[[pl:Osteopatia]]
[[pt:Osteopatia]]
[[ru:Остеопатия]]
[[sq:Osteopatia]]
[[fi:Osteopatia]]
[[sv:Osteopati]]
[[tl:Osteopatiya]]
[[tr:Osteopati]]
[[zh:整骨療法]]

Talk:Osteopathy

2011-07-26T18:52:15Z

Theroofbeam: /* Alternative Medicine */ new section

{{talkheader}}
{{Rational Skepticism|class=Start|importance=mid|attention=yes}}
{{WikiProject Alternative medicine|class=Start}}
{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}
|maxarchivesize = 70K
|counter = 2
|minthreadsleft = 7
|algo = old(90d)
|archive = Talk:Osteopathy/Archive %(counter)d
}}
{{archives|bot=MiszaBot|age=90}}

== Recent changes ==

I've undone [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Osteopathy&action=historysubmit&diff=339420596&oldid=338842178 recent changes] that expand the description of differences between osteopathy in the US and the rest of the world in the lead, and expand on controversy surrounding cranial osteopathy. These changes seemed lacking in [[WP:RS|reliable source]]s to back them up. The difference between US and international osteopathy was already clearly explained, it did not need an additional unsourced paragraph, especially not in the [[WP:LEAD|lead]] which is only supposed to be a summary of the article. Quack Watch is not a reliable source on cranial osteopathy, it's self-published. Likewise it's not possible to generalise from a single published paper on cranial osteopathy to stating how it's regarded by many osteopaths or by the scientific community, you need a source that states that. It's [[WP:OR|original research]] to draw such broad conclusions from a [[WP:PRIMARY|primary source]]. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy|talk]]) 21:57, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I am not sure that much of the current article on osteopathy stands up to scrutiny. The literature is hardly going to be resplendent with papers on osteopathy, even less so concerned with cranial. I think to attempt to suppress expression of the controversy within and without osteopathy concerning cranial osteopathy by dismissing the sources as the content is unpalatable is using procedural obfustication. Using quality control to justify censorship and give a distorted picture of the place that cranial in fact has. ([[User:Cyberdrivel|Cyberdrivel]] ([[User talk:Cyberdrivel|talk]]) 03:30, 29 January 2010 (UTC))

:Wikipedia isn't based on the [[WP:OR|opinion]] of we editors, it's based on reliable sources. That's one of its [[WP:V|founding principles]]. They don't have to be academic articles, they can be books, newspaper articles, etc. But you do need a source for statements, and you can't elaborate on the source. [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy|talk]]) 19:02, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

== Osteopathy v Osteopathic medicine ==

The distinction is accepted and adopted by The American Osteopathic Association, the Osteopathic International Alliance, and the World Health Organization.

Here's the links:
*[http://www.oialliance.org/pdf/oia_bylaws.pdf Osteopathic international Alliance, By-Laws]
*[http://www.osteopathic.org/index.cfm?PageID=mc_kitstyle American Osteopathic Association, Style guide]
*[http://www.osteopathy.ca/ Canadian federation of Osteopaths]

In my opinion, this article should follow these established guidelines. [[User:Hopping|Bryan Hopping]] [[User talk:Hopping|T ]] 18:43, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

:Isn't that distinction already made by having the separate articles [[Osteopathy]] and [[Osteopathic medicine in the United_States]]? [[User:Ryan Paddy|Ryan Paddy]] ([[User talk:Ryan Paddy|talk]]) 17:58, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

::Yes, the distinction should also be made in the article. Right now, its a bit blurry. The lead even suggests the terms are "interchangeable." [[User:Hopping|Bryan Hopping]] [[User talk:Hopping|T ]] 04:57, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Indeed, the terms '''are''' interchangeable outside the USA. Both terms are used in the UK. There are nine institutions which qualify people for registration as osteopaths with the General Osteopathic Council: these include the British College of Osteopathic Medicine, earlier known as the British College of Naturopathy and Osteopathy: their main qualification has been upgraded to a Masters degree in Osteopathy (MOst) of the University of Westminster, which may be accompanied by a Diploma in Osteopathy (DO) and a Diploma in Naturopathy (ND). The Surrey Institute of Osteopathic Medicine offers a BSc (Hons) and an MOst, both in Osteopathic Medicine. The websites show that these two colleges teach similar curricula to the six colleges or schools giving degrees in Osteopathy. The ninth, the London College of Osteopathic Medicine, previously the London College of Osteopathy, has a much shorter course for those already qualified in medicine and teaches only osteopathic manipulative medicine.

This equivalence of terms in the UK was added to the [[Osteopathic Medicine]] article on 8th December 2007, only to be ripped out by Bryan Hopping and moved to the [[Osteopathy]] article, the former thereafter becoming "Osteopathic Medicine in the USA." The reference to British degrees in Osteopathic Medicine remained until 24th April 2009, when it was removed by an anonymous editor, who came back this year to vandalise the London School of Osteopathy's article.

This variation in terminology is found with many forms of alternative medicine. No distinction can be drawn between homoeopathy and homoeopathic medicine, or between ayurveda and ayurvedic medicine. The American situation is closer to that in India where practitioners ostensibly qualified in another system incorporate forms of investigation and treatment from modern medicine, in which they may or may not have also been trained, except that the American osteopaths seem to have gone all the way to scientific medicine but insist on keeping the old name. Would it not make more sense just to say that they practice "medicine?" After all, the medical school at Irvine, California, no longer claims to be osteopathic, just as that of Drexel University no longer claims to be homeopathic.

As this article is explicitly not about the USA, there is no need to adopt their idiosyncratic usage. [[User:NRPanikker|NRPanikker]] ([[User talk:NRPanikker|talk]]) 02:00, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
:I agree that these terms have a long history of interchangeable usage, but I also see that multiple international organizations have adopted by-laws that attempt to make their usages distinct. See above sources. [[User:Hopping|Bryan Hopping]] [[User talk:Hopping|T ]] 04:08, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

::Of the three references above, only the American Osteopathic Association defines "osteopathic medicine," which it says can be practiced only by people trained in the United States. The Osteopathic International Alliance is based in Chicago, was incorporated in the state of Illinois and its property reverts to the American Osteopathic Foundation. They define only "osteopath" and "osteopathic physician," and make no mention of "osteopathic medicine." The Canadian Federation of Osteopaths, founded as recently as 2005, is an affiliate of the OIA and reproduces their definitions of "osteopath" and "osteopathic physician." These are American or American-orientated organisations whose terminology should not be allowed to over-ride the usage of organisations in the rest of the world in an article explicitly about osteopathy outside the USA. [[User:NRPanikker|NRPanikker]] ([[User talk:NRPanikker|talk]]) 01:03, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

== Automatic archiving ==

{{diff|Talk:Osteopathy|370487120|357525177|I've set up an automatic archiving}} of this talk page, seeing as it was getting a bit long. Let me know if anyone objects. [[User:Gabbe|Gabbe]] ([[User talk:Gabbe|talk]]) 21:55, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

== "New Zea land"? ==

Is there any particular reason why a space appears almost everywhere New Zealand is mentioned in this article? I notice that Firefox's spell-check doesn't recognize "Zealand" and its first stock suggestion for unrecognized compound words is to split them with a space--not sure if that's somehow involved here. Given that the New Zealand article makes no mention of any alternate spellings, I think I'll go ahead and be bold and assume it was just a spell-check dictionary omission that someone acted upon (i.e. I'll change them back). --[[User:MilFlyboy|MilFlyboy]] ([[User talk:MilFlyboy|talk]]) 23:30, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
: Nevermind. I should've checked the revision history first. An anonymous user went nuts with spell-check in the last revision. I reverted it.--[[User:MilFlyboy|MilFlyboy]] ([[User talk:MilFlyboy|talk]]) 23:42, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

== POV, Fringe, Minimal, and Inferior ==

This article is POV in that Osteopathy is often viewed as somewhat fringe, of minimal efficacy, and a degree in it is typically viewed as an inferior degree to an MD. As far as I know, only an osteopathic doctor views it as on an equal footing with nonfringe medicine. This article does not mention this so is pro-Osteopathy POV (maybe I missed it, in which case it is written in an UDUEly positive POV). Reading the article as my sole information source, one would think it does not have the shady reputation it does (whether or not this reputation is justified). If this critical view is actually true in any part, that also should be in the article. [[User:PPdd|PPdd]] ([[User talk:PPdd|talk]]) 05:28, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

: [[Comparison of MD and DO in the United States]] has a more complete discussion. I would say that a DO in the United States (as opposed to the more alternative practices elsewhere) should have minimal interaction with the [[WP:FRINGE]] guideline. By my personal impression, it looks like osteopathic medical schools have somewhat lower standards than medical schools, but they have largely overcome the early unsupported claims. - [[User talk:2over0|2/0]] ([[Special:Contributions/2over0|cont.]]) 13:10, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
::I'm sure a "board certified" acupuncturist might disagree with you as to other fringe. LOL :) [[User:PPdd|PPdd]] ([[User talk:PPdd|talk]]) 20:39, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

== UNDUE ==

The section, "Osteopathy around the world" is so long it dominates the article. Instead of being ''about'' osteopathy, it reads like an attempt to promote a view of legitimacy by name dropping. [[User:PPdd|PPdd]] ([[User talk:PPdd|talk]]) 23:09, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

: Change the section name to ''Regulation'', but keep the subsections; there is probably something in the [[WP:MEDMOS|MEDMOS]] than supports this, but if nothing else the current name does not convey a proper encyclopedic tone. Make sure that we properly convey the difference between actual regulation and professional associations. Nix the single news items and run a source check for anything talking about the other kind of osteopathy. The lists of schools are probably okay for the more targeted regional articles, but are overlong here. Cut or merge most of the educational detail except where needed in discussion of the regulations. Sound about right? - [[User talk:2over0|2/0]] ([[Special:Contributions/2over0|cont.]]) 04:18, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
::My complaint is really upside down. The info on what osteopathy is UNDUEly little, not the other info is uduely too much. I still have no idea what osteopaty is beyond being people who got rejected from med school, or the rare people who had a lifelong passion to do some obscure manipulation tehcnique that they haven't even learned yet when they apply to the osteo school, so they could not know what it is they wanted to do their whole life when they were wanting to do it. It makes no sense to me, but the article sounds like what a osteo doctor said to me when I asked the difference. In instead of explaining a difference, he went into a dfensinve rant about how accredited it is, etc. [[User:PPdd|PPdd]] ([[User talk:PPdd|talk]]) 05:17, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

== Opening paragraph--definition? ==

I feel that most Wikipedia pages start with a clear explanation of the topic at the beginning. This page's opening discusses use of the word/s, what the idea is based upon, etc., but it is not clear in what osteopathy ''is''. How can this be addressed? Is it really based upon the philosophy of the interrelationship of body structure and function, or is it just that philosophy, period? —Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/38.106.151.154|38.106.151.154]] ([[User talk:38.106.151.154|talk]]) 15:09, 24 March 2011 (UTC) 

Agreed. The article is vague and woolly, and I still have no real idea what osteopathy is supposed to be. Sounds like pseudoscience, and the article comes across as propaganda. —Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/86.144.24.118|86.144.24.118]] ([[User talk:86.144.24.118|talk]]) 11:32, 17 May 2011 (UTC) 

== Alternative Medicine ==

The philosophy of osteopathic medicine falls within the evidence-based paradigm of conventional medicine. The concept of 'health' and 'wellness' are nuanced in Osteopathic Medicine to impart a specific emphasis in clinical practice.

The wikipedia page on [[Medicine]] states in regard to the legal controls for medical doctors:
"While the laws generally require medical doctors to be trained in "evidence based", Western, or [[Hippocratic]] Medicine, they are not intended to discourage different paradigms of health."

Don't be evil

2010-08-19T03:38:35Z

Theroofbeam: /* Controversy */

{{Quotefarm|date=April 2009}}
"'''Don't be evil'''" is the informal corporate [[motto]] (or slogan) of [[Google]],<ref>[http://investor.google.com/conduct.html Google Code of Conduct]</ref> originally suggested by Google employees [[Paul Buchheit]]<ref>[http://blogoscoped.com/archive/2007-07-16-n55.html Paul Buchheit on Gmail, AdSense and More]</ref> and Amit Patel<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.smh.com.au/news/biztech/dont-be-evil/2008/04/15/1208025168177.html?page=3|title=Don't Be Evil or don't lose value?|work=The Sydney Morning Herald | date=2008-04-15}}</ref> at a meeting. Buchheit, the creator of [[Gmail]], said he "wanted something that, once you put it in there, would be hard to take out," adding that the slogan was "also a bit of a jab at a lot of the other companies, especially our competitors, who at the time, in our opinion, were kind of exploiting the users to some extent." However, the official corporate philosophy of Google<ref>[http://www.google.com/corporate/tenthings.html Google Corporate Information - Our Philosophy]</ref> does not contain the words "Don't be evil". The statement that can be considered nearest to the supposedly 'Don't be evil' motto (so widely circulated by the media) is the 6th point of the 10 point corporate philosophy of Google which says, "'''You can make money without doing evil.'''"<ref>[http://www.google.com/corporate/tenthings.html Google Corporate Information - Our Philosophy]</ref>

"Don't be evil" is said to recognize that large corporations often maximize short-term profits with actions that may not be in the best-interest of the public. Supposedly, by instilling a Don't Be Evil culture, the corporation establishes a baseline for honest decision-making that disassociates Google from any and all cheating. This in turn can enhance the trust and image of the corporation that outweighs short-term gains from violating the Don't Be Evil principles.

While many companies have [[ethical code]]s to govern their conduct, Google claims to have made "Don't Be Evil" a central pillar of their identity, and part of their self-proclaimed core values.<ref>[http://blogoscoped.com/archive/2007-06-01-n17.html Google Hamburg Gallery]</ref> In 2006, when Google declared their self-censorship move into China, their "Don't be evil" motto was somewhat replaced with an "evil scale" balancing system, allowing smaller evils for a greater good, as explained by CEO [[Eric E. Schmidt|Eric Schmidt]] at the time.<ref>[http://www.infoworld.com/article/06/01/27/74874_HNgoogleceocensoring_1.html Google CEO on censoring: "We did an evil scale"]</ref>

==Origin of the motto==
According to John Battelle's book on Google, ''[[The Search (book)|The Search]],'' the phrase "Don't be evil" was not coined by [[Sergey Brin]] or [[Larry Page]], but rather by [[Paul Buchheit]], the engineer behind [[Gmail]]:

{{quotation|On July 19, 2001, about a dozen early employees met to mull over the founders' directive [to elucidate Google's core values] ... The meeting soon became cluttered with the kind of easy and safe corporate clichés that everyone can support, but that carry little impact: Treat Everyone with Respect, for example, or Be on Time for Meetings.
 
The engineers in the room were rolling their eyes. [Amit] Patel recalls: "Some of us were very anticorporate, and we didn't like the idea of all these specific rules. And engineers in general like efficiency — there had to be a way to say all these things in one statement, as opposed to being so special"
 
That's when Paul Buchheit, another engineer in the group, blurted out what would become the most important three words in Google's corporate history. "Paul said, 'All of these things can be covered by just saying, Don't Be Evil,'" Patel recalls. "And it just kind of stuck."
 
... In the months after the meeting, Patel scribbled "Don't Be Evil" in the corner of every whiteboard in the company... The message spread, and it was embraced, especially by Page and Brin... "I think it's much better than Be Good or something," Page jokes. "When you are making decisions, it causes you to think. I think that's good."}}

==Avoiding conflicts of interest==
In their 2004 founders' letter<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1288776/000119312504142742/ds1a.htm#toc59330_1 |publisher=SEC |title=
Letter from the founders, "an owner's manual" for google's shareholders |date=14 Aug 2004}}</ref> prior to their [[initial public offering]], [[Lawrence E. Page]] and [[Sergey Brin]] explained that their "Don't be evil" culture prohibited [[conflicts of interest]], and required [[objectivity (journalism)|objectivity]] and an absence of [[bias]]:

{{quotation|Google users trust our systems to help them with important decisions: medical, financial and many others. Our search results are the best we know how to produce. They are unbiased and objective, and we do not accept payment for them or for inclusion or more frequent updating. We also display advertising, which we work hard to make relevant, and we label it clearly. This is similar to a well-run newspaper, where the advertisements are clear and the articles are not influenced by the advertisers’ payments. We believe it is important for everyone to have access to the best information and research, not only to the information people pay for you to see.}}

[http://www.law.berkeley.edu/php-programs/faculty/facultyProfile.php?facID=6494 Chris Hoofnagle] agrees <ref>{{cite journal |volume=14 |number=4 - 6 |month=April |year=2009 |journal=First Monday |first=Chris |last=Hoofnagle |url=http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2326/2156 |title=Beyond Google and evil: How policy makers, journalist and consumers should talk differently about Google and privacy }}</ref> that Google's original intention expressed by the "don't be evil" motto is linked to the company's separation of search results from advertising. However, he argues that clearly separating search results from sponsored links is required by law, thus, Google's practice is now mainstream and no longer remarkable or good. According to Hoofnagle, Google should abandon the motto because:

{{quotation|The evil talk is not only an albatross for Google, it obscures the substantial consumer benefits from Google’s advertising model. Because we have forgotten the original context of Google’s evil representations, the company should remind the public of the company’s contribution to a revolution in search advertising, and highlight some overlooked benefits of their model.}}

==Controversy==
{{See also|Criticism of Google}}
Some products and actions by Google have been accused of contradicting the company's "Don't be evil" ethic; [[Amnesty International]] and [[Human Rights Watch]] strongly condemned Google's [[Google_China#Controversies|compliance]] with China's [[Golden Shield Project]],<ref>[http://www.hrw.org/reports/2006/china0806/5.htm#_Toc142395827 "Race to the Bottom": Corporate Complicity in Chinese Internet Censorship: II. How Censorship Works in China: A Brief Overview]</ref> calling it [[Censorship by Google|a form of self-censorship]]. According to Amnesty,

{{quotation|These forms of censorships seem to contradict the very principles that Google — whose unofficial motto is "don’t be evil" — was founded upon. Until January 2006, Google's Support Center claimed that it "does not censor results for any search term", but removed this claim after reaching its deal with China.<ref>[http://web.amnesty.org/pages/internet-110506-action-eng Amnesty International]</ref>}}

However, [[Elliot Schrage]], at the time vice-president of public communications and global affairs, at a testimony hearing before the Committee on International Relations of the U.S. House of Representatives, responded to these accusations with an [[apologetics|apology]] where he claims that it is better for Chinese citizens to have access to some of Google, which can be achieved via partial self-censorship, than to be completely censored anyway by the Chinese government and given no access at all. He goes on to state that "we believe that our current approach to China is consistent with this mantra ['don't be evil']. Our hope is that our mix of measures, though far from our ideal, would accomplish more for Chinese citizens’ access to information than the alternative." <ref>[http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2006/02/testimony-internet-in-china.html Official Google Blog: Testimony: The Internet in China]</ref>

In January 2010 Google experienced a [[Operation Aurora|cyber attack]] on their corporate infrastructure, in an attempt to crack [[Gmail]] accounts of human rights activists in China. Google stated they will no longer censor results on google.cn even if it means pulling out of China.<ref>[http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/new-approach-to-china.html Official Google Blog: A New Approach to China]</ref>

Also in January 2010, Apple CEO Steve Jobs strongly criticized the slogan, saying: "We did not enter the search business. They entered the phone business. Make no mistake they want to kill the iPhone. We won’t let them ... This don’t be evil mantra: “It’s bullshit”.<ref>[http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/01/googles-dont-be-evil-mantra-is-bullshit-adobe-is-lazy-apples-steve-jobs/ Google’s ‘Don’t Be Evil’ Mantra Is ‘Bullshit,’ Adobe Is Lazy: Apple’s Steve Jobs (Update 2)]</ref>

In August 2010, Google joined with Verizon on issuing a policy proposal that was criticized by some bloggers and journalists as damaging to [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality net neutrality]. <ref>[http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2010/08/10-media-takes-on-the-google-verizon-net-neutrality-proposal 10 Media Takes on the Google-Verizon Net Neutrality Proposal]</ref> It was suggested that Google should change its motto to "Don't. Be evil."

==See also==
* [[Googlization]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

==External links==
*[http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/new-approach-to-china.html Google stop all censorship in china]
*[http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.01/google_pr.html "Google vs. Evil"] at ''[[Wired (magazine)|Wired]]'' magazine
*[http://www.google.com/corporate/tenthings.html Google's corporate philosophy]
*[http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2326/2156 Beyond Google and Evil: How policy makers, journalists and consumers should talk differently about Google and privacy]

{{Google Inc.}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Don't Be Evil}}
[[Category:Business ethics]]
[[Category:Google]]
[[Category:Mottos]]
[[Category:Slogans]]

[[be-x-old:Don't be evil]]
[[it:Don't Be Evil]]
[[no:Don't be evil]]
[[sq:Don't Be Evil]]
[[th:Don't be evil]]
[[zh:Google#口號]]

Brooke Greenberg

2010-08-06T00:22:51Z

Theroofbeam: /* Unexplained condition */

{{Article issues
| expand = August 2009
| orphan = August 2009
|refimprove =August 2009}}

{{Infobox person
| name = Brooke Greenberg
| image =
| alt =
| caption =
| birth_date = {{Birth date and age|mf=yes|1993|1|8}}
| birth_place = {{city-state|Baltimore|Maryland}}, U.S.
| nationality = American
| other_names =
| known_for = "[[Syndrome X]]" disease
| occupation =
}}

'''Brooke Greenberg''' (born January 8, 1993), is a teenager from [[Reisterstown, Maryland]], who has remained physically and cognitively similar to a [[toddler]], despite her increasing age. She is about 30 inches (76 cm) tall, weighs about 16 pounds (7.3 kg), and has an estimated [[mental age]] of 9 months to 1 year. Brooke's doctors have termed her condition [[Syndrome X]].

== Birth and early life==
Brooke was born on January 8, 1993 at Sinai Hospital in [[Baltimore, Maryland]], one month prior to her [[due date]], weighing just four pounds (1.8 kg). She was born with [[anterior hip dislocation]], a condition which caused her legs to be swiveled upwards, awkwardly, toward her shoulders; this was corrected surgically. Otherwise,
Brooke appeared to be a normal [[infant]].<ref name="msnbc">[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9778227/ A child frozen in time]: Unexplained and unusual, 12-year-old Brooke still looks like an infant. By Sara James, [[NBC News]], Oct. 23, 2005</ref>

In her first six years, Brooke Greenberg went through a series of unexplained [[Medical emergency|medical emergencies]] from which she recovered. She had seven perforated [[stomach ulcers]]. She also suffered a [[seizure]]. This was followed by what was later diagnosed as a [[stroke]]; weeks later, no damage was detected. At age five, Brooke had a mass in her brain that caused her to sleep for 14 days. The doctors diagnosed the mass as a [[brain tumor]]. However, Brooke later awoke, and physicians found no tumor present. Brooke's pediatrician, Dr. Lawrence Pakula, states that the source of her
sudden illness remains a mystery.<ref name="abc1"/>

==Unexplained condition==
Over the past several years, the Greenbergs visited many specialists, looking for an explanation for their daughter's strange condition, yet there has been no diagnosis of any known genetic syndrome or chromosomal abnormality.<ref>{{Cite pmid|19428454}}</ref> In 2001, when ''[[Dateline NBC|Dateline]]'' documented Brooke, she was still the size of a six-month-old infant, weighing just 13 lb (5.9 kg) at 27 inches (69 cm) tall. The family still had no explanation. Brooke Greenberg's mother Melanie said: ''"They [the specialists] just said she’ll catch up. Then we went to the [[nutritionist]], the [[endocrinologist]]. We tried the [[growth hormone]]..."''. The growth hormone treatment had no effect. Howard, Brooke's father, said: ''"I mean she did not put on an ounce or she did not grow an inch ... That’s when I knew there was a problem."'' After the growth hormone administration failed, the doctors, unable to [[medical diagnosis|diagnose]] a known condition, named her condition ''Syndrome X''.

The Greenbergs made many visits to nearby [[Johns Hopkins Children's Center]], and even took Brooke to New York’s [[Mount Sinai Hospital, New York|Mount Sinai Hospital]], searching for information about their daughter’s condition.<ref name="msnbc"/> When [[geneticist]]s sequenced Greenberg's [[DNA]], they found that the [[gene]]s associated with the [[DNA repair-deficiency disorder|premature aging disease]]s were normal, unlike the [[Genetic mutation|mutated]] versions in patients with [[Werner syndrome]] and [[progeria]].<ref name="newscientist">[http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17379-teenage-baby-may-lack-master-ageing-gene.html Teenage 'baby' may lack master ageing gene], by Andy Coghlan, ''[[New Scientist]]'', June 25, 2009</ref>

==Study of Greenberg==
In 2006, [[Richard Walker (doctor)|Richard Walker]], PhD in endocrine physiology,<ref>{{Cite web
|url=http://www.dovepress.com/journal-editor--clinical-interventions-in-aging-eic4
|title=Clinical Interventions in Aging, Editor-in-Chief
|date=2009
|publisher=Dove Medical Press Ltd.
|accessdate=2010-07-25}}</ref>
of the [[University of South Florida College of Medicine]], said that Brooke's body is not developing as a coordinated unit, but as independent parts that are out of sync. She has never been diagnosed with any known [[genetic disorder]] or [[chromosomal abnormality]] that would help explain why.<ref name="abc1">{{cite news
|url=http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Health/story?id=7880954&page=1
|title=Doctors Baffled, Intrigued by Girl Who Doesn't Age
|last=Brown
|first=Bob
|date=2006-06-23
|work=Health
|publisher=[[ABC News]]
|accessdate=2009-06-27}}</ref>

In 2009, Walker said: "There've been very minimal changes in Brooke's brain ... Various parts of her body, rather than all being at the same stage, seem to be disconnected." Walker noted that Greenberg's brain, for example, is not much more mature than that of a newborn infant. He estimates her mental age at around 9 months to a year old. Brooke can make gestures and recognize sounds, but [[Mutism|cannot speak]]. Her bones are like those of a ten-year-old, and she still has her [[deciduous teeth|baby teeth]], which have an estimated developmental age of about 8 years. Said Walker, "We think that Brooke's condition presents us with a unique opportunity to understand the process of aging."<ref>{{Cite web
|url=http://www.nationalledger.com/lifestyle/article_272631718.shtml
|title=Brooke Greenberg Frozen in Time - 17-Year Old 'Toddler'
|work=National Ledger
|date=May 10, 2010
|accessdate=May 12, 2010}}</ref>

Her [[telomere]]s seem to be shortening at the normal rate.<ref>{{Cite web
|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mad.2009.02.003
|title=A case study of "disorganized development" and its possible relevance to genetic determinants of aging
|author=Walker, Pakulac, Sutcliffe, Kruk, Graakjaer, Shay
|publisher=''Mechanisms of Ageing and Development'', 130 (2009), 350–356
}}</ref>

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[http://www.abcnews.go.com/2020/Health/Story?id=7880954&page=1 Doctors Baffled, Intrigued by Girl Who Doesn't Age]: Years Pass, but Brooke Greenberg Remains a Toddler. No One Can Explain How or Why.
*[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,538020,00.html The Curious Case of Brooke Greenberg]: 16-Year-Old Has the Body and Mind of a Toddler
*Video of perpetual toddler Brooke Greenberg [http://video.foxnews.com/v/3937480/frozen-in-time] A video of Brooke on "Fox and Friends" in August 2009.
*[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/1490520/Brooke-looks-like-any-other-baby-girl.-But-in-fact-shes-12-years-old.html Brooke looks like any other baby girl. But in fact, she's 12 years old]
*[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,529036,00.html Doctors Baffled: Girl, 16, Has Body of a Toddler, Still Can't Speak]
*[http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2009/06/26/2009062600758.html The Girl Who Stopped Growing]
*[http://www.wbaltv.com/news/4484968/detail.html Young Girl Has Not Aged In Years]
*[http://thestar.com.my/lifestyle/story.asp?file=/2009/6/30/lifefocus/4207979&sec=lifefocus Rare conditions]
*[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1195203/Doctors-baffled-mystery-condition-sees-teenage-girl-body-toddler-unable-eat-walk.html Doctors baffled by mystery condition that sees teenage girl with body of toddler unable to eat or walk]
*[http://thestar.com.my/lifestyle/story.asp?file=/2009/6/30/lifefocus/4207976&sec=lifefocus Forever young]
*[http://www.myfoxmemphis.com/dpp/health/dpgo_teen_has_body_of_baby_lwf_062409_2607659 16-Year-Old Has the Body of a Baby]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Greenberg, Brooke}}
[[Category:Rare diseases]]
[[Category:1993 births]]
[[Category:Living people]]
[[Category:American children]]
[[Category:People from Baltimore, Maryland]]

[[de:Brooke Greenberg]]
[[fr:Brooke Greenberg]]
[[ru:Гринберг, Брук]]

Brooke Greenberg

2010-08-05T17:27:01Z

Theroofbeam: /* Unexplained condition */

{{Article issues
| expand = August 2009
| orphan = August 2009
|refimprove =August 2009}}

{{Infobox person
| name = Brooke Greenberg
| image =
| alt =
| caption =
| birth_date = {{Birth date and age|mf=yes|1993|1|8}}
| birth_place = {{city-state|Baltimore|Maryland}}, U.S.
| nationality = American
| other_names =
| known_for = "[[Syndrome X]]" disease
| occupation =
}}

'''Brooke Greenberg''' (born January 8, 1993), is a teenager from [[Reisterstown, Maryland]], who has remained physically and cognitively similar to a [[toddler]], despite her increasing age. She is about 30 inches (76 cm) tall, weighs about 16 pounds (7.3 kg), and has an estimated [[mental age]] of 9 months to 1 year. Brooke's doctors have termed her condition [[Syndrome X]].

== Birth and early life==
Brooke was born on January 8, 1993 at Sinai Hospital in [[Baltimore, Maryland]], one month prior to her [[due date]], weighing just four pounds (1.8 kg). She was born with [[anterior hip dislocation]], a condition which caused her legs to be swiveled upwards, awkwardly, toward her shoulders; this was corrected surgically. Otherwise,
Brooke appeared to be a normal [[infant]].<ref name="msnbc">[http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9778227/ A child frozen in time]: Unexplained and unusual, 12-year-old Brooke still looks like an infant. By Sara James, [[NBC News]], Oct. 23, 2005</ref>

In her first six years, Brooke Greenberg went through a series of unexplained [[Medical emergency|medical emergencies]] from which she recovered. She had seven perforated [[stomach ulcers]]. She also suffered a [[seizure]]. This was followed by what was later diagnosed as a [[stroke]]; weeks later, no damage was detected. At age five, Brooke had a mass in her brain that caused her to sleep for 14 days. The doctors diagnosed the mass as a [[brain tumor]]. However, Brooke later awoke, and physicians found no tumor present. Brooke's pediatrician, Dr. Lawrence Pakula, states that the source of her
sudden illness remains a mystery.<ref name="abc1"/>

==Unexplained condition==
Over the past several years, the Greenbergs visited many specialists, looking for an explanation for their daughter's strange condition, yet there has been no diagnosis of any known genetic syndrome or chromosomal abnormality.{{Cite pmid|19428454}}. In 2001, when ''[[Dateline NBC|Dateline]]'' documented Brooke, she was still the size of a six-month-old infant, weighing just 13 lb (5.9 kg) at 27 inches (69 cm) tall. The family still had no explanation. Brooke Greenberg's mother Melanie said: ''"They [the specialists] just said she’ll catch up. Then we went to the [[nutritionist]], the [[endocrinologist]]. We tried the [[growth hormone]]..."''. The growth hormone treatment had no effect. Howard, Brooke's father, said: ''"I mean she did not put on an ounce or she did not grow an inch ... That’s when I knew there was a problem."'' After the growth hormone administration failed, the doctors, unable to [[medical diagnosis|diagnose]] a known condition, named her condition ''Syndrome X''.

The Greenbergs made many visits to nearby [[Johns Hopkins Children's Center]], and even took Brooke to New York’s [[Mount Sinai Hospital, New York|Mount Sinai Hospital]], searching for information about their daughter’s condition.<ref name="msnbc"/> When [[geneticist]]s sequenced Greenberg's [[DNA]], they found that the [[gene]]s associated with the [[DNA repair-deficiency disorder|premature aging disease]]s were normal, unlike the [[Genetic mutation|mutated]] versions in patients with [[Werner syndrome]] and [[progeria]].<ref name="newscientist">[http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17379-teenage-baby-may-lack-master-ageing-gene.html Teenage 'baby' may lack master ageing gene], by Andy Coghlan, ''[[New Scientist]]'', June 25, 2009</ref>

==Study of Greenberg==
In 2006, [[Richard Walker (doctor)|Richard Walker]], PhD in endocrine physiology,<ref>{{Cite web
|url=http://www.dovepress.com/journal-editor--clinical-interventions-in-aging-eic4
|title=Clinical Interventions in Aging, Editor-in-Chief
|date=2009
|publisher=Dove Medical Press Ltd.
|accessdate=2010-07-25}}</ref>
of the [[University of South Florida College of Medicine]], said that Brooke's body is not developing as a coordinated unit, but as independent parts that are out of sync. She has never been diagnosed with any known [[genetic disorder]] or [[chromosomal abnormality]] that would help explain why.<ref name="abc1">{{cite news
|url=http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Health/story?id=7880954&page=1
|title=Doctors Baffled, Intrigued by Girl Who Doesn't Age
|last=Brown
|first=Bob
|date=2006-06-23
|work=Health
|publisher=[[ABC News]]
|accessdate=2009-06-27}}</ref>

In 2009, Walker said: "There've been very minimal changes in Brooke's brain ... Various parts of her body, rather than all being at the same stage, seem to be disconnected." Walker noted that Greenberg's brain, for example, is not much more mature than that of a newborn infant. He estimates her mental age at around 9 months to a year old. Brooke can make gestures and recognize sounds, but [[Mutism|cannot speak]]. Her bones are like those of a ten-year-old, and she still has her [[deciduous teeth|baby teeth]], which have an estimated developmental age of about 8 years. Said Walker, "We think that Brooke's condition presents us with a unique opportunity to understand the process of aging."<ref>{{Cite web
|url=http://www.nationalledger.com/lifestyle/article_272631718.shtml
|title=Brooke Greenberg Frozen in Time - 17-Year Old 'Toddler'
|work=National Ledger
|date=May 10, 2010
|accessdate=May 12, 2010}}</ref>

Her [[telomere]]s seem to be shortening at the normal rate.<ref>{{Cite web
|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mad.2009.02.003
|title=A case study of "disorganized development" and its possible relevance to genetic determinants of aging
|author=Walker, Pakulac, Sutcliffe, Kruk, Graakjaer, Shay
|publisher=''Mechanisms of Ageing and Development'', 130 (2009), 350–356
}}</ref>

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
*[http://www.abcnews.go.com/2020/Health/Story?id=7880954&page=1 Doctors Baffled, Intrigued by Girl Who Doesn't Age]: Years Pass, but Brooke Greenberg Remains a Toddler. No One Can Explain How or Why.
*[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,538020,00.html The Curious Case of Brooke Greenberg]: 16-Year-Old Has the Body and Mind of a Toddler
*Video of perpetual toddler Brooke Greenberg [http://video.foxnews.com/v/3937480/frozen-in-time] A video of Brooke on "Fox and Friends" in August 2009.
*[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/1490520/Brooke-looks-like-any-other-baby-girl.-But-in-fact-shes-12-years-old.html Brooke looks like any other baby girl. But in fact, she's 12 years old]
*[http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,529036,00.html Doctors Baffled: Girl, 16, Has Body of a Toddler, Still Can't Speak]
*[http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2009/06/26/2009062600758.html The Girl Who Stopped Growing]
*[http://www.wbaltv.com/news/4484968/detail.html Young Girl Has Not Aged In Years]
*[http://thestar.com.my/lifestyle/story.asp?file=/2009/6/30/lifefocus/4207979&sec=lifefocus Rare conditions]
*[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1195203/Doctors-baffled-mystery-condition-sees-teenage-girl-body-toddler-unable-eat-walk.html Doctors baffled by mystery condition that sees teenage girl with body of toddler unable to eat or walk]
*[http://thestar.com.my/lifestyle/story.asp?file=/2009/6/30/lifefocus/4207976&sec=lifefocus Forever young]
*[http://www.myfoxmemphis.com/dpp/health/dpgo_teen_has_body_of_baby_lwf_062409_2607659 16-Year-Old Has the Body of a Baby]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Greenberg, Brooke}}
[[Category:Rare diseases]]
[[Category:1993 births]]
[[Category:Living people]]
[[Category:American children]]
[[Category:People from Baltimore, Maryland]]

[[de:Brooke Greenberg]]
[[fr:Brooke Greenberg]]
[[ru:Гринберг, Брук]]

Blind Willie Johnson

2010-07-24T22:13:50Z

Theroofbeam:

{{Otherpeople|Willie Johnson}}
{{Refimprove|date=December 2007}}
{{Infobox musical artist 
| Name = "Blind" Willie Johnson
| Img = BlindWillieJohnson.jpg
| Img_capt =
| Img_size =
| Landscape =
| Background = solo_singer
| Birth_name =
| Alias = "Blind" Willie "Blind" Texas Marlin The Blind Pilgrim
| Born = {{birth date|1897|1|22}} near [[Brenham, Texas]], [[USA]]
| Died = {{death date and age|1945|9|18|1897|1|22}}
| Origin =
| Instrument = [[Guitar]]
| Genre =[[Blues]], [[Gospel]]
| Voice_type =
| Occupation = Preacher, Musician
| Years_active =
| Label =
| Associated_acts =
| Notable_instruments = Guitar
}}
'''"Blind" Willie Johnson''' (January 22, 1897 – September 18, 1945) was an [[United States|American]] [[singer]] and [[guitarist]] whose music straddled the border between [[blues music|blues]] and [[spirituals]]. While the lyrics of all of his songs were religious, his music drew from both sacred and blues traditions. Among musicians, he is considered one of the greatest [[slide guitar|slide]] or [[bottleneck guitar|bottleneck]] [[guitar]]ists, as well as one of the most revered figures of [[Great Depression|depression-era]] [[gospel]] music.{{Citation needed |reason=The only source that a google search brings back for this statement is a biased source}} His music is distinguished by his powerful bass thumb-picking and gravelly false-bass voice, with occasional use of a tenor voice.

==Life==
Blind Willie Johnson was born in 1897 near [[Brenham, Texas]] (before the discovery of his death certificate, [[Temple, Texas]] had been suggested as his birthplace).<ref>{{cite web |author=Corcoran, Michael |title=The Soul of Blind Willie Johnson |url=http://www.austin360.com/music/content/music/blindwilliejohnson_092803.html |accessdate=2009-10-28 }}</ref> When he was five, he told his father he wanted to be a preacher, and then made himself a [[cigar box guitar]]. His mother died when he was young and his father remarried soon after her death.<ref name="Charters, 1993, p. 11">Charters, 1993, p. 11.</ref>

Johnson was not born [[Blindness|blind]], and, although it is not known how he lost his sight, Angeline Johnson told Samuel Charters that when Willie was seven his father beat his stepmother after catching her going out with another man. The stepmother then picked up a handful of [[lye]] and threw it, not at Willie's father, but into the face of young Willie.<ref name="Charters, 1993, p. 11"/>

It is thought that Johnson was married twice, first to a woman with the same first name, Willie B Harris, and later to a young singer named Angeline, who was the sister of blues guitarist L.C. Robinson.{{Citation needed|date=April 2010}} No marriage certificates have yet been discovered.{{Citation needed|date=April 2010}} As Angeline Johnson often sang and performed with him,{{Citation needed|date=April 2010}} the first person to attempt to research his biography, [[Samuel Charters]], made the mistake of assuming it was Angeline who had sung on several of Johnson's records.{{Citation needed|date=April 2010}} However, later research showed that it was Johnson's first wife.{{Citation needed|date=April 2010}}

Johnson remained poor until the end of his life, preaching and singing in the streets of [[Beaumont, Texas]] to anyone who would listen. A city directory shows that in 1944, a Rev W J Johnson, undoubtedly Blind Willie, operated the House of Prayer at 1440 Forrest Street, Beaumont, Texas.<ref>{{cite web |author=Corcoran, Michael |title=The Soul of Blind Willie Johnson |url=http://www.austin360.com/music/content/music/blindwilliejohnson_092803.html |accessdate=2008-04-21 }} 4th paragraph from end</ref> This is the same address listed on Blind Willie's death certificate. In 1945, his home burned to the ground. With nowhere else to go, Johnson lived in the burned ruins of his home, sleeping on a wet bed in the August/September Texas heat. He lived like this until he contracted [[malaria]] and died. (The death certificate reports the cause of death as malarial fever, with syphilis and blindness as contributing factors.)<ref>{{cite web |author=Corcoran, Michael |title=The Soul of Blind Willie Johnson |url=http://www.austin360.com/music/content/music/blindwilliejohnson_092803.html |accessdate=2008-11-13 }} 9th paragraph</ref> In a later interview his wife said she tried to take him to a hospital but they refused to admit him because he was black, while other sources report that, according to Johnson's wife, his refusal was due to his blindness. Although there is some dispute as to where his exact grave location is, in 2009, the Blanchette cemetery was officially located by two researchers.<ref>Obek and Ford, 2010</ref> Members of the Beaumont community and researchers are committed to preserving it.

==Musical career==
His father would often leave him on street corners to sing for money, where his powerful voice left an indelible impression on passers-by. Legend has it that he was arrested for nearly starting a riot at a [[New Orleans]] courthouse with a powerful rendition of "If I Had My Way I'd Tear the Building Down", a song about [[Samson]] and [[Delilah]]. According to Samuel Charters, however, he was simply arrested while singing for tips in front of a Custom House, by a police officer who misconstrued the title lyric and mistook it for incitement.<ref>Charters, 1993, p. 14.</ref>

Johnson made 30 commercial [[recording studio]] [[gramophone record|record]] sides in five separate sessions for [[Columbia Records]] from 1927–1930. On some of these recordings Johnson uses a fast rhythmic picking style, while on others he plays slide guitar. According to a reputed one-time acquaintance, [[Blind Willie McTell]] (1898-1959), Johnson played with a brass ring, although other sources cite him using a knife. However, in enlargement, the only known photograph of Johnson seems to show that there is an actual bottleneck on the little finger of his left hand. <ref>http://www.wirz.de/music/johbwfrm.htm</ref>While his other fingers are apparently fretting the strings, his little finger is extended straight--which also suggests there is a slide on it as well.

Some of Johnson's most famous recordings include "[[In My Time of Dying]]" (identified as "Jesus Make up My Dying Bed" on his recordings), the stirring "[[It's Nobody's Fault But Mine]]", his rendition of the famous gospel song "Let Your Light Shine On Me", as well as the raw, powerful "[[Dark Was the Night, Cold Was the Ground]]", where he sings in wordless [[Hum (sound)|hum]] and moans about the [[crucifixion]] of [[Jesus]]. This song was a "moaning" piece related to the Bentonia school of blues practiced by such "eerie voiced" artists as [[Skip James]] and [[Robert Johnson (musician)|Robert Johnson]]. On 14 of his recordings he is accompanied by Willie B Harris or an as-yet-unidentified female singer. This group of recordings includes "Church I'm Fully Saved Today", "[[John the Revelator (song)|John the Revelator]]", "[[You'll Need Somebody on Your Bond]]", and "Keep Your Lamp Trimmed and Burning".

==Legacy==
His records have kept his music tremendously influential and his songs have been covered by several popular artists, including [[Led Zeppelin]] (However, contrary to popular belief, Johnson is not featured on the album cover of ''[[Led Zeppelin II]]''. There is only one known photo of Johnson in existence, and it is not the same face as the one shown on the Led album cover),{{Citation needed|date=February 2010}} [[Bob Dylan]], [[The 77s]], [[Beck]], [[Phil Keaggy]] and [[The White Stripes]] (who have covered "John the Revelator", as well as covering "Motherless Children Have A Hard Time" and "Lord, I Just Can't Keep From Cryin'" live). [[Billy Childish]] has covered "John the Revelator" with his band The Buff Medways and it was a staple of their live performances. "John the Revelator" was also recorded by [[delta blues|delta blues musician]] [[Son House]], and "Keep Your Lamp Trimmed and Burning" was recorded by another delta blues musician, [[Fred McDowell]].
In 1968, British group [[Fairport Convention]] recorded a cover of "Dark Was The Night, Cold Was The Ground" under the title "The Lord is in this Place...How Dreadful Is This Place". "If I Had My Way I'd Tear the Building Down" was recorded by [[Peter, Paul, and Mary]]; retitled as "[[Samson and Delilah (song)|Samson and Delilah]]". It was frequently performed by the [[Grateful Dead]] and appears on the studio album ''[[Terrapin Station]]''; [[Reverend Gary Davis|Gary Davis]] also has recorded a version of the song; [[Bruce Springsteen]] has performed a version of the song live with the [[Seeger Sessions]] Band, In the opening scene of the second season of [[Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles]], [[Shirley Manson]] sings a version of this song. "[[Nobody's Fault But Mine]]" has also been covered by [[Mason Jennings]], [[Nina Simone]], and was modified by Led Zeppelin. [[Nick Cave]] has performed "John the Revelator" live, and based his song "City of Refuge," from his band [[Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds|the Bad Seeds]]' 1988 album [[Tender Prey]], on the "Blind" Willie song of the same name. In the liner notes of a 2002 record by [[Derek Bailey]], [[Marc Ribot]] compared "Dark Was The Night, Cold Was the Ground" to the music of [[Django Reinhardt]] and the [[avant garde]] guitarist Bailey. Many of his songs, and those of [[Rev. Gary Davis]], were recorded in the late 1980s by gospel blues musicians [[Glenn Kaiser]] and [[Darrell Mansfield]], on their album ''Trimmed & Burnin''.
In 1991 [[Bruce Cockburn]] covered "Soul of a Man" on his album ''Nothing But A Burning Light'', the title in itself a line from the same song. In 1994 [[Ben Harper]] added a short cover excerpt of "By and By I'm Going To See The King" as a hidden track on his debut album "[[Welcome To The Cruel World]]". "Trouble Soon be Over" was covered by [[Colin Linden]] on the album ''Easin' back to Tennessee''.

In 2003 Deep Sea Records issued a CD tribute called ''Dark was the Night'', featuring artists such as [[Martin Simpson]], [[Gary Lucas]], [[Mary Margaret O'Hara]] and [[Jody Stecher]].

Johnson's recordings and legacy have crossed over into other media and cultural contexts. ''Dark Was The Night, Cold Was the Ground'' was included on the [[Voyager Golden Record]], sent into space with the [[Voyager spacecraft]] in 1977; this piece was used in the widely seen science show ''[[Cosmos: A Personal Voyage]]'' by [[Carl Sagan]] in 1980.<ref>[http://www.users.bigpond.com/cosmic_voyager/Cosmos%20Episode%2010%20-%20The%20Edge%20of%20Forever.htm www.users.bigpond.com/cosmic_voyager]</ref> Blind Willie Johnson's music and life were featured in the 2003 film "The Soul of a Man" by Wim Wenders for the PBS series "The Blues." The film deals extensively with the Voyager spacecraft recording. This recording also got Johnson mentioned on an episode of the television series ''[[The West Wing (television)|The West Wing]]'' (see "[[The Warfare of Genghis Khan]]"); the fictional [[Deputy White House Chief of Staff]] [[Josh Lyman]] used Johnson's recording to show the depth and soul behind the space program. As mentioned by Lyman, ''Johnson's music left the solar system on December 16, 2004''. ''Dark Was The Night'' was the soundtrack for [[The Warfare of Genghis Khan]] episode of the West Wing. ''Dark Was The Night'' has also been covered by [[Jack Rose]]. It was also mentioned in an episode of ''[[FlashForward]]'' episode Revelation Zero (Part 2) with the same story being told about the music being sent into space.

The song is also used in [[Pier Paolo Pasolini]]'s ''The Gospel According to St Matthew;'' ''Walk the Line'', a [[biopic]] of country singer [[Johnny Cash]]; and ''The Devil's Rejects'', a serial killer film by rocker [[Rob Zombie]]. [[Ry Cooder]], who based his desolate soundtrack to [[Paris, Texas (film)|''Paris, Texas'']] on "Dark Was the Night, Cold Was the Ground", described it as "the most soulful, transcendent piece in all American music."<ref>{{cite web |author=Corcoran, Michael |title=The Soul of Blind Willie Johnson |url=http://www.austin360.com/music/content/music/blindwilliejohnson_092803.html |accessdate=2008-11-13 }}</ref>

In 2006 [[Eric Burdon]] covered his song "Soul of a Man" for his album ''[[Soul of a Man (2006 album)|Soul of a Man]]''.

In 2007 David Lindley covered "Soul of a Man", on his album 'Big Twang'.

In 2009 [[4AD]] put out a compilation CD titled "Dark Was The Night", featuring [[Kronos Quartet]] covering the song "Dark Was The Night".

==Notes==
{{reflist}}

==References==
*[[Samuel Charters|Charters, Samuel]] (1993). ''The Complete Blind Willie Johnson'', CD booklet. Columbia/Legacy C2K 52835.
*Blakey, D. N. (2007). ''Revelation Blind Willie Johnson; the biography; the man, the words, the music''. ISBN 1430328991
* Charters, Samuel (1959). "The Country Blues" Ch. 12 - published in UK by: Jazz Book Club (1961). Some facts in the book are at variance with those given in this article and may represent an earlier stage of research
*Obek and Ford (2010) "Ain't Got No Home, Following the Trail of Blind Willie Johnson", http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:wl5m0LSm3XEJ:blindwilliejohnsonfund.com/uploads/On_the_Trail_of_Blind_Willie_Johnson_216.pdf+ain't+got+no+home+blind+willie&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESjotmGis-SChTrG6rSjdsWZgRU2-1-nwtDS2TpDaTq2yGs185QploTwiN8KpQQ4T8Kk53iNr1hJhcAfiZ3ezSiw0fbZQCaJ1Z5LEqOMmrQ949V4_jtzDVEZuVLgwAGaWdVr7XNV&sig=AHIEtbTQsu7DsgjNVAMQyyNChXLfXzz45A
*[http://www.nodepression.com/profiles/blogs/dark-was-the-night-the-life Dark Was the Night: The Life and Times of Blind Willie Johnson]

==External links==
{{Commons category|Blind Willie Johnson}}
* [http://www.austin360.com/music/content/music/blindwilliejohnson_092803.html Biographical article]
* [http://www.wirz.de/music/johnsbw.htm Illustrated Blind Willie Johnson discography]
* [http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=creator:%22Blind%20Willie%20Johnson%22 MP3 Audio Files of Songs by Blind Willie Johnson on the Internet Archive]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Johnson, Blind Willie}}
[[Category:1945 deaths]]
[[Category:People from Beaumont, Texas]]
[[Category:African American musicians]]
[[Category:American blues guitarists]]
[[Category:American Protestants]]
[[Category:Country blues singers]]
[[Category:American male singers]]
[[Category:Gospel blues musicians]]
[[Category:Slide guitarists]]
[[Category:Blind musicians]]
[[Category:Blind bluesmen]]
[[Category:Vocalion Records artists]]
[[Category:1897 births]]
[[Category:Texas blues musicians]]

[[de:Blind Willie Johnson]]
[[el:Μπλάιντ Γουίλι Τζόνσον]]
[[es:Blind Willie Johnson]]
[[fr:Blind Willie Johnson]]
[[it:Blind Willie Johnson]]
[[he:וילי ג'ונסון העיוור]]
[[pt:Blind Willie Johnson]]
[[fi:Blind Willie Johnson]]
[[sv:Blind Willie Johnson]]

User:Theroofbeam

2010-07-11T04:30:42Z

Theroofbeam:

It is (to describe it figuratively) as if an author were to make a slip of the pen, and as if this clerical error became conscious of being such. Perhaps this was no error but in a far higher sense was an essential part of the whole exposition. It is, then, as if this clerical error were to revolt against the author, out of hatred for him, were to forbid him to correct it, and were to say, "No, I will not be erased, I will stand as a witness against thee, that thou art a very poor writer."
– Søren Kierkegaard

User:Theroofbeam

2010-07-11T04:29:58Z

Theroofbeam: ←Created page with '"It is (to describe it figuratively) as if an author were to make a slip of the pen, and as if this clerical error became conscious of being such. Perhaps this was ...'

Sarcopenia

2010-07-10T22:25:24Z

Theroofbeam: /* Management */

{{Update|date=October 2009}}
'''Sarcopenia''' (from the Greek meaning "poverty of flesh") is the degenerative loss of [[skeletal muscle]] mass and strength associated with [[aging]]. Sarcopenia is a component of the [[Frailty syndrome]]. 0.5-1% of loss per year after the age of 25
{{tocright}}
==Markers of sarcopenia==

Sarcopenia is characterized first by a decrease in the size of the [[muscle]], which causes weakness and frailty. However, this loss of muscle mass may be caused by different cellular mechanisms than those that cause [[muscle atrophy]]. For example, during sarcopenia, there is a replacement of muscle fibres with [[fat]] and an increase in [[fibrosis]].

== Benefit of exercise==

[[Exercise]] and increases in activity have been shown to be beneficial in settings of sarcopenia; exercise even in the very old can increase strength and muscle function.

Lack of exercise is currently thought to be a significant risk factor, increasing the likelihood of sarcopenia.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Abate M, Di Iorio A, Di Renzo D, Paganelli R, Saggini R, Abate G |title=Frailty in the elderly: the physical dimension |journal=Eura Medicophys |volume=43 |issue=3 |pages=407–15 |year=2007 |month=September |pmid=17117147 |doi= |url=http://www.minervamedica.it/index2.t?show=R33Y2007N03A0407}}</ref>

Not only muscle but the entire musculoskeletal system of muscle, neuromuscular responsiveness, endocrine function, vasocapillary access, tendon, joint, ligament, and bone, depends on regular and lifelong exercise to maintain integrity. The slow attenuation, atrophy, or loss of muscle tissue that medical professionals sometimes describe as sarcopenia (literally, "flesh loss') is currently thought to be the result of cumulative loss of musculoskeletal strength and mass associated with chronic absence of exercise of sufficient intensity or volume. However, even highly trained athletes experience the effects of sarcopenia. It is interesting to note that athletic speed and strength records are generally set by individuals no older than 30 years of age, although some powerlifters and other strength athletes continue to set records into their 50s.{{Citation needed|date=October 2009}}

== Fiber-type changes in sarcopenia==

Simple [[circumference]] measurement does not provide enough data to determine whether or not an individual is suffering from severe sarcopenia. Sarcopenia is also marked by a decrease in the circumference of distinct types of [[muscle fiber]]s. Skeletal muscle has different fiber-types, which are characterized by expression of distinct [[myosin]] variants. During sarcopenia, there is a decrease in "type 2" fiber circumference ([[Muscle fiber#Type II|Type II]]), but not nearly as much "type I" fiber circumference ([[muscle fiber#Type I|Type I]]). However, we lose both type I and type II muscle fibers (muscle cells) equally as we age (contrary to popular belief that we lose type II more rapidly).{{Citation needed|date=January 2010}}

==Loss of satellite cell function==

[[Satellite cells]] are small mononuclear cells that abut the muscle fiber. [[Satellite cell]]s are normally activated upon injury or exercise. These cells then differentiate and fuse into the muscle fiber, helping to maintain its function. One theory is that sarcopenia, is in part casued by a failure in satellite cell activation.{{Citation needed|date=January 2010}}
Therefore, the ability to repair damaged muscles or respond to nutritional signals is impaired.

==Loss of anabolic signals==

Extreme muscle loss is often a result of both diminishing [[anabolic]] signals, such as [[growth hormone]] and [[testosterone]], and promotion of [[catabolic]] signals, such as pro-inflammatory [[cytokines]].{{Citation needed|date=January 2010}}

==Sarcopenia as a public-health problem==

Due to the lessened physical activity and increased [[longevity]] of industrialized populations, sarcopenia is emerging as a major health concern. Sarcopenia may progress to the extent that an older person may lose his or her ability to live independently. Furthermore, sarcopenia is an important independent predictor of disability in population-based studies, linked to poor balance, gait speed, falls, and fractures. Sarcopenia can be thought of as a muscular analog of [[osteoporosis]], which is loss of bone, also caused by inactivity and counteracted by exercise. The combination of [[osteoporosis]] and sarcopenia results in the significant frailty often seen in the elderly population.

== Natural history ==

Strength losses with ageing for men and women are relatively similar. They are greater for lower than upper extremity muscles. Maximum attainable strength peaks in mid-twenties and declines thereafter. The decline is precipitous after 65 years of age, though few longitudinal studies exist on this topic. A direct assessment of the effects of sarcopenia, even in extremely physically fit individuals, can be seen in the age-related decline in [[Masters athletics (track and field)]] world records of muscle-intensive sports, such as weight lifting. No substance-free, proven Olympic weight-lifting record has been set by any athlete of either sex or any weight class above the age of 31. ((''However, in the non-Olympic sport of powerlifting, many world records in several weight divisions have been accomplished by athletes well into their forties, purportedly, "verified" by the [[International Powerlifting Federation]] to have been accomplished drug-free. However, that this certification carries any weight is doubtful considering that even in highly supervised events such as the Olympics, drug cheating invariably occurs (some of which is detected right away, much of it is not). Furthermore, casting doubt on any records set outside the traditional Olympic athletic system, drug cheating is rampant in professional sports that do not perform random drug testing (e.g. baseball).''))

== Diagnosis ==
Consensus on clinical diagnosis of sarcopenia has quickly developed over the last decade around the working definition proposed in 1998 by Baumgartner et al. <ref>{{cite journal |author=Baumgartner RN, Koehler KM, Gallagher D, ''et al.'' |title=Epidemiology of sarcopenia among the elderly in New Mexico |journal=Am. J. Epidemiol. |volume=147 |issue=8 |pages=755–63 |year=1998 |month=April |pmid=9554417 |doi= |url=http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=9554417}}</ref>, which uses a measure of lean body mass as determined by [[Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry]] (DEXA) compared to a normal reference population. His working definition uses a cut point of 2 standard deviations below the mean of lean mass for gender specific healthy young adults.

This methodology is attractive for definitive diagnosis in clinical settings as well for several reasons. Primarily, emerging research shows it is predictive of negative outcomes and it is also a method familiar to most clinicians. This later point is especially true for those that treat the geriatric population, given its similarity to the 1996 [[World Health Organization]] (WHO) methodology for definitive diagnosis of [[osteoporosis]], which also uses DEXA, but uses a measure of lean mass rather than bone mineral density (BMD). DEXA is widely used already in clinical settings in develop countries to identify and monitor severity of osteoporosis. And the degree of sarcopenia can be measured using DEXA in patients being evaluated for osteoporosis, at the same time with the same scan, with no added cost or radiation exposure to the patient.

Since Baumgartner’s working definition first appeared, some several consensus groups have refined the definition, including the recent joint effort of the European Society on Clinician Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) Special Interest Groups (SIG) on geriatric nutrition and on [[cachexia]]-[[anorexia]] in chronic wasting diseases. Their consensus definition is:

1) A low muscle mass, >2 standard deviations below that mean measured in young adults (aged 18–39 years in the 3rd NHANES population) of the same sex and ethnic background, and
2) Low gait speed (e.g. a walking speed below 0.8 m/s in the 4-m walking test).
However, it can be replaced by one of the well-established functional tests utilized locally as being part of the comprehensive geriatric assessment.<ref>{{cite journal |author= Muscaritoli M, Anker S, Argilés J, ''et al.'' |title= Consensus definition of sarcopenia, cachexia and pre-cachexia: Joint document elaborated by Special Interest Groups (SIG) “cachexia-anorexia in chronic wasting diseases” and “nutrition in geriatrics” |journal= Clinical Nutrition | year=2010 |doi=10.1016/j.clnu.2009.12.004 |url=http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0261561409002428 |pmid= 20060626 |volume= 29 |issue= 2 |pages= 154–9}}</ref>

There remains many opportunities for further refinement of reference populations by ethic groups, and to further correlate of the degrees of severity of sarcopenia to overt declines in functional performance (preferably using verified functional tests), as well as incidence of hospitalization admissions, morbidity and mortality. Work toward this objective has already begun, and the body of research to date clearly points toward severe sarcopenia is predicative of negative outcomes, similar to what already been shown to exist with the [[Frailty syndrome]], as defined by the criteria set forth in 2001 by Fried et al. <ref>{{cite journal |author= Fried LP, Tangen CM, Walston J, ''et al.'' |title= Frailty in Older Adults: Evidence for a Phenotype. |journal= J Gerontol a Biol Sci Med Sci. |year=2001|url= http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11253156}}</ref>

== Management ==
Primary management of sarcopenia is through the application of a graded exercise program, across both cardiovascular and strength domains, dosed in such a way as to provoke beneficial adaptation without overloading the weakened body.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Taaffe DR |title=Sarcopenia--exercise as a treatment strategy |journal=Aust Fam Physician |volume=35 |issue=3 |pages=130–4 |year=2006 |month=March |pmid=16525526 |doi= |url=http://www.racgp.org.au/afp/200603/3608}}</ref>

Possible therapeutic strategies include use of testosterone or anabolic steroids, though long term use of these agents is controversial in men given concerns of prostate symptoms, and essentially contraindicated in women, given concerns of virilization. Recent experimental results have shown testosterone treatments may induce adverse cardiovascular events.<ref name="pmid20592293">{{cite journal |author=Basaria S, Coviello AD, Travison TG, ''et al.'' |title=Adverse Events Associated with Testosterone Administration |journal=N Engl J Med |volume= |issue= |pages= |year=2010 |month=June |pmid=20592293 |doi=10.1056/NEJMoa1000485 |url=http://content.nejm.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=short&pmid=20592293&promo=ONFLNS19}}</ref> Other approved medications have been shown to have little to no effect in this setting, including agents such DHEA and human growth hormone. New therapies in clinical development hold great promise in this area, including the Selective Androgen Receptor Modulators (SARMs), as evidenced by recent studies. Nonsteriodal SARMs are of particular interest, given they exhibit significant selectivity between the anabolic effects of testosterone on muscle, but apparently with little to no androgenic effects such as prostate stimulation in men or virilization in women.

Nutritional evaluation may also be indicated if malnutrition is suspected, or current nutritional intake is insufficient to maintain adequate total body mass, although increased exercise also increases appetite. Physical activity incorporating resistance training is probably the most effective measure to prevent and treat sarcopenia.

An extract from the plant Ginkgo biloba (EGb 761) was shown to reduce the muscle loss in a rat model of sarcopenia (Bidon ''et al''., 2009)<ref>{{cite journal |author=Bidon C, Lachuer J, Molgó J, Wierinckx A, de la Porte S, et al. |year=2009 |title=The Extract of Ginkgo biloba EGb 761 Reactivates a Juvenile Profile in the Skeletal Muscle of Sarcopenic Rats by Transcriptional Reprogramming. |journal=PLoS ONE 4(11): |url=http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0007998 |doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0007998 |pmid=19956636 |volume=4 |issue=11 |pages=e7998 |pmc=2778626}}</ref>.

==See also==
* [[Sarcopenic obesity]]

== References ==
{{reflist}}
*{{cite journal |author=Roubenoff R |title=Physical activity, inflammation, and muscle loss |journal=Nutr. Rev. |volume=65 |issue=12 Pt 2 |pages=S208–12 |year=2007 |month=December |pmid=18240550 |doi= 10.1111/j.1753-4887.2007.tb00364.x|url=http://openurl.ingenta.com/content/nlm?genre=article&issn=0029-6643&volume=65&issue=12%20Pt%202&spage=S208&aulast=Roubenoff}}

*{{cite journal |author=Lynch GS |title=Tackling Australia's future health problems: developing strategies to combat sarcopenia—age-related muscle wasting and weakness |journal=Intern Med J |volume=34 |issue=5 |pages=294–6 |year=2004 |month=May |pmid=15151679 |doi=10.1111/j.1444-0903.2004.00568.x |url=}}

*{{cite journal |author=Edström E, Ulfhake B |title=Sarcopenia is not due to lack of regenerative drive in senescent skeletal muscle |journal=Aging Cell |volume=4 |issue=2 |pages=65–77 |year=2005 |month=April |pmid=15771610 |doi=10.1111/j.1474-9728.2005.00145.x |url=}}

*{{cite journal |author=Fujita S, Volpi E |title=Amino acids and muscle loss with aging |journal=J. Nutr. |volume=136 |issue=1 Suppl |pages=277S–80S |year=2006 |month=January |pmid=16365098 |doi= |url=http://jn.nutrition.org/cgi/pmidlookup?view=long&pmid=16365098}}

*{{cite journal |last=Visser |first=Marjolein |authorlink= |coauthors=Deeg D, Lips P |year=2003 |month= |title=Low vitamin D and high parathyroid hormone levels as determinants of loss of muscle strength and muscle mass (sarcopenia) |journal=J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab. |volume=88 |issue=12 |pages=5766–5772 |id= |url=http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=15356420 |accessdate= 2007-11-06 |quote=|doi=10.1210/jc.2003-030604|pmid=14671166 }}

[[Category:Aging-associated diseases]]
[[Category:Geriatrics]]
[[Category:Rehabilitation medicine]]

[[de:Sarkopenie]]
[[es:Sarcopenia]]
[[fr:Sarcopénie]]
[[it:Sarcopenia]]
[[pt:Sarcopenia]]