Talk:Gut-brain signalling

Graeme Daniel Logue 16:11, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Rachael Hutt 16:21, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Pauline McAleer 14:30, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Andrew Critchley 14:36, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Very good start, good selection. Any news from Andrew? Celine Caquineau 09:30, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

How's the plan going? Andrew, I need to know if you're still here! Celine Caquineau 14:15, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi Celine, sorry I thought I had signed it but I hadn't done it right! This website is quite tricky to get the hang of. Yes we have a rough plan of what we are going to cover and are currently writing our individual sub-sections.Andrew Critchley 14:40, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Glad to hear from you, Andrew! You'll get use to the website in no time! Celine Caquineau 10:44, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Your article so far: This week’s deadline was to produce a rough draft with an introduction and a well structured plan illustrating the direction and focus of your article. Good start with the introduction, however the article’s plan is not clear. You need to state each section and subsection with appropriate titles like you have done for ‘orexigenic signals’. I also suggest removing sentences & references from the original template to tidy up the article a bit more.

What has been written is written well. Remember to keep the sentences simple and to define any ‘too scientific’ terms to ensure your encyclopaedia article can be understood by every reader. Including diagrams could help explaining difficult concepts.

Your bibliography page is good, however you need to link key facts and studies mentioned in your main article with references in the text as well as in the ‘References’ section at the end of your article ( If needed the bibliography page will be then updated accordingly).

Have a look at the other articles. Some of them cover subjects close or even similar to yours, you might have to insert links between your page and theirs.

Finally, I can only encourage all of you to contribute equally to produce a very good article. You need to interact and communicate more (use the talkpage!). I have no doubt that you will be producing a very good article but you need to raise your game now! Celine Caquineau 14:33, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

It's good, easy to read. I'll try and do a link between my page and a bit on your page. Rachael Kirkbride 18:02, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

The only thing i'd say isn't clear is how the vagus nerve is involved in neural signalling from the gut... (I understand about how it's involved in hormonal signalling). 'Emily Moore 18:29, 29 October 2009 (UTC)'

Yes Emily, you're right to point this out as a priority. Look at this sentence, "CCK is one of the most abundant neuropeptides in the CNS. It acts as a hunger suppressant by activating CCKB receptors found throughout the brain. It mediates satiety and can cause anxiety and nausea." Yes ..but...does this have anything to do with gut-brain signalling? Gareth Leng 15:06, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

I enjoyed reading this article and I thought the layout was good. Maybe a conclusion at the end to summarise what you're article is saying would be useful as some parts are fairly complex. Amelia Sheldon 15:02, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

This is a great topic, and you've written it well. Can I suggest maybe some visual aids (a diagram showing the brain and all the inhibitory/excitatory inputs on appetite) to sum it up? Neil R. J. Watson 15:49, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

i'd agree with the comments above, figures and a conclusion would be great (slightly hypocritical seeing as ours doesn't have them yet :s) also would be good to link your article to ours (exercise and body weight) we touch on a couple of similar points Robert Parsons 10:23, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi, this was really well written and has a good layout. Like rob said above, you could possibly link this article to ours as well as we mention ghrelin in our food reward page. Sarah Mee 11:43, 3 November 2009 (UTC).

I agree with what's been said above...very easy to follow...some pictures would be good!Juliet Carmichael 16:46, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

This topic is really interesting to read and has been written very clearly. i agree that some diagrams will help to illustrate the pathways that you are talking about. also, just a couple of very small things... under the anorexic signalling there are a few typo's and possibly an over-use of brackets..? totally your shout if you keep them in or not but I just think it slightly disrupts the flow of the text. Rachael White 16:45, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

A really interesting and well written article, however i do agree with Rachael that the use of brackets is a bit excessive and disrupts the flow of the text. Also the inclusion of a few visual aids might help to clarify some of your points. ...said Katherine Laura Greenall (talk)

There are diagrams to go up, i'm unsure if they are complete or if there has been a problem putting them up. I've also quickly re-read the anorexic signalling section and corrected a couple of mistakes and taken out some of the brackets but as it wasn't my section i didn't want to change too much...thanks for the comments though. Rachael Hutt 21:13, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree with the comments above, it reads well. It's a vast theme in need of nice diagrams to illustrate some signalling pathways. and a conlcusion would be great too. But overall well done! Celine Caquineau 15:36, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

This article is very clear, especially with many areas of gut-brain signialling still unclear in the litterature. I found your referencing during the text and interpretation very good and insightful. Katie Gallagher 17:15, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Feedback

Strongest point - very well done for getting into the scientific literature,finding original studies, and reporting them clearly. The article is well structured, and the writing clear and concise. Warning - the literature can be inconsistent, there is substantial disagreement, and sometimes the papers you find are contradicted by others. For example, ghrelin actions via the vagus - lots of dispute about how important this is. Obestatin - getting very murky here, original findings not well supported since. Generally I think you've done very well here though. As commented above, diagrams are a good discipline -they force you to pick the most important things.Gareth Leng 14:44, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Strong statement

Gareth, is this interesting statement true for all obese individuals, or just a certain subset?

• "In obese individuals, GLP-1 secretion is decreased. When weight is lost in obese individuals GLP-1 secretion returns to normal (so GLP-1 could contribute to the pathogenesis of obesity). GLP-1 agonists have been targeted as a potential therapy for obesity; GLP-1 itself is not suitable as a clinical treatment for obesity as it has a very short half-life (about two minutes). "

D. Matt Innis 15:01, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Seems to be generally true, can never know if it's universally true - probably more related to glucose status than body weight per se. Currently GLP-1 agonists are being looked at as candidate drugs for managing type 2 diabetes {http://clinical.diabetesjournals.org/content/23/2/56.full see here], and as part of combination drug therapies for obesity.Gareth Leng 17:38, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

I figured that was what you were working on. It wasn't clear to me in the article how we know whether a decreased level of GLP-1 is a 'cause' or 'effect' of obesity? Is there something that makes this link? D. Matt Innis 20:14, 23 July 2011 (UTC)