Talk:Christine Maggiore
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] | ||
 |
Make sure to supply full citations when adding information and consider tagging or removing uncited/unciteable information. |
 Archives |
Contents |
[edit] Pejorative implications...
The statement "Maggiore instead followed a naturopathic program and had a third Pap test performed by another doctor under an assumed name, which she wrote was normal" uses the words "she wrote" to indicate skepticism. Given that much of the article is based on Christine's statements (even many of the articles written about her are based on interviews with her and thus also based on her statements). I believe that these words should be deleted unless someone can provide a source giving evidence that they are not true (i.e. that her pap smear was not normal). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DavidRCrowe (talk • contribs) 17:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC).
- I prefer to include the attribution ("she wrote"). I don't view it as pejorative per se, but I do think that since Maggiore has an unorthodox approach to medical issues, it's best to indicate on medical matters when we are reflecting what she has written, rather than what is objectively corroborated. For example, regarding her test for HPV, Maggiore wrote that she had never had any sexually transmitted disease, when in fact she has HIV. Of course, HIV is transmitted in a number of ways (not just sexually), but nonetheless her statement reflects her minoritarian view of HIV as harmless, and thus should not be presented unattributed as fact. Similarly, claiming that cervical dysplasia "qualified her for an AIDS diagnosis" is incorrect - only invasive cervical cancer would be an AIDS-defining illness, and that diagnosis is not made by Pap smear alone. Maggiore wrote that "cervical dysplasia and cervical cancer" (emphasis mine) are AIDS-defining illnesses, when in fact only invasive cervical cancer is listed as such - an error, although clearly useful as a rhetorical device. Again, these are reasons why her writings on medical matters should probably be clearly attributed as such. That said, I'll wait to hear from other editors before making a change here. MastCell Talk 18:43, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
- "She wrote" is in no way pejorative, and improves the article's accuracy. It's appropriate to source a statement which reports the result of a test performed by an unknown doctor under a pseudonym. - Nunh-huh 18:49, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Does Christine Maggiore have HIV+/AIDS?
The article is unclear. It says she had a positive test, then a bunch of indeterminate tests, and finally says that her husband and son have been tested and are negative. Has she disclosed a subsequent confirming positive test? Whig 05:21, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
-
- Yes, it does describe her that way. But then it goes on to say, "However, following some anomalous HIV test results (negative, positive and indeterminate) and subsequently an interaction with prominent AIDS dissident Peter Duesberg in 1994, she began to question whether HIV did in fact cause AIDS. Maggiore came to believe that her positive test may have been due to flu shots, pregnancy, or a common viral infection.[2]" Whig 22:04, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
- Maggiore denies that her daughter had HIV+/AIDS, as well. Does she now claim to have or not have HIV positivity? Whig 23:51, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- So far as I know from the sources here, Maggiore has always felt that HIV is harmless and the HIV test unreliable. I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to get at, or what part of it is specifically relevant to the article, which covers her history and beliefs in some depth. MastCell Talk 23:56, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- The lead sentence states a fact which Maggiore contests. If she is presumed HIV positive on the basis of the pathology of her daughter, then that's what the article should state. Whig 23:59, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
Oh. Well, if that's the issue, then numerous reliable sources describe her as "HIV-positive" and thus Wikipedia should do so as well. MastCell Talk 00:10, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
- No quantity of reliable sources can cause a fact to be true or false. Whig 00:28, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
- We could write, "According to [reliable sources], Christine Maggiore is HIV+." Whig 00:29, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
-
- The bar for inclusion on Wikipedia is verifiability via reliable sources. This item is verifiable via reliable sources. We don't preface every verifiable item with "According to ..." MastCell Talk 16:35, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- It is not factually supported other than by the pathology of her daughter. It is not necessary to use the phrasing, but a citation should be placed so that readers know what source they are relying upon. Whig 18:37, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Of course it's factually supported - it's been reported by numerous reliable sources with fact-checking facilities, and the positive test has been described by Maggiore himself. It's utterly uncontroversial and well-documented, and your focus on this point is baffling. But if you want to stick an extra footnote in there, be my guest. MastCell Talk 23:10, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] The moral imperative in editing
As Wikipedia editors we have an obligation to edit according to policies, inclusion criteria, balance, etc.. That's all fine and good, but it is not enough. We have other obligations not imposed by Wikipedia policies, but by moral obligations and common decency.
We need to be careful when dealing with this and other similar subjects to protect the public and patients. Reckless editing that only looks at what is required or allowed by Wikipedia can mean articles include statements or include omissions that put readers at risk.
We can see from the history of Christine Maggiore how her actions and the actions of other AIDS dissidents have caused actual deaths and no doubt will continue to cause many more by the propagation of their dangerous nonsense. If we edit in such a manner that readers are prevented from understanding the seriousness of this error, they too will be put in danger by OUR editing, and WE will become culpable for their dangerous decisions. AIDS denialism is causing people to refuse treatment and to act recklessly, thus endangering themselves and others.
If there is any doubt, we must err on the side of reason and safety, and this can be done while editing according to policies here. Just because something is allowed by Wikipedia policies does not mean it is necessary or wise to do it. We must make choices, and we should choose carefully when deciding what to include or not to include. I think that the excuse "I was just following Wikipedia policies" will ring pretty hollow when we are confronted with the knowledge that our editing has caused deaths. Careful editing can help prevent them.
Fellow editors, please keep this in mind when editing. Thanks. -- Fyslee / talk 17:05, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] This is a biographical article
It is not appropriate to use this as part of a political wrestling match, except insofar as that controversy is properly contextualized. The vast majority of scientists accept that HIV causes AIDS, but this is independent of whether or not Christine Maggiore is HIV positive. Whig 23:08, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
- The question of whether or not she is HIV positive is being discussed in another section, not here. -- Fyslee / talk 00:55, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
-
- Agreed. All that was needed here was a reference, and now two have been added, which is much better. Thank you. Whig 01:03, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
