Talk:Apolipoprotein B

Physiology Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physiology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physiology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysiologyWikipedia:WikiProject PhysiologyTemplate:WikiProject PhysiologyPhysiology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article has been classified as relating to blood.

Molecular Biology: MCB Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Molecular Biology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Molecular Biology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Molecular BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject Molecular BiologyTemplate:WikiProject Molecular BiologyMolecular Biology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Molecular and Cell Biology task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

It would be good to add notes about ApoB levels (normal and abnormal and desired) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.116.163.199 (talk) 06:49, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

Is Apolipoprotein B same as apoprotein B? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.134.72.149 (talk) 19:47, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've heard the terms used interchangeably, although I'm not certain "apoprotein" is considered as accurate/proper a description. DoctorEric (talk) 20:53, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Opening paragraph too LDL centered

Although the article does later discuss lipoproteins other than LDL that are associated with ApoB (IDL, VLDL, TG, and even chylomicrons), the only one mentioned in the opening paragraph is LDL. Admittedly this is the most important of the group, but the main reason ApoB is superior to a standard LDL-C measurement is that ApoB measures all the atherogenic particles in the blood (especially if it's directly measured, rather than just calculated). If you agree, please consider rewriting the opening paragraph to reflect this deficiency DoctorEric (talk) 21:00, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Uniformity

In various places in the article, apolipoprotein B is referred to as "APOB," "ApoB," and "apoB." Let's choose just one, and stick with it. My personal preference would be for "ApoB" since it is the abreviation of the first word, and the initial of the subtype. "APOB" looks like the intitials of 4 words. DoctorEric (talk) 21:20, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As previously proposed, and without objection from other users in over a year, I made the article uniform by changing all APOB to ApoB (with the exception of the APOB gene, according to convention). I marked this as a minor edit, since no other aspects of the article were altered -- I even resisted the urge to fix spelling and grammatical errors I came across. I think I found and corrected all of them, but feel free to correct any I may have overlooked. I hope future editors take this uniformity into consideration. DoctorEric (talk) 20:56, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Role in Innate Immune System

I am not a biologist. The following is written in a style appropriate to an abstract in a biological journal. Someone who knows what this means should rewrite it in a style appropriate to a general-purpose encyclopedia at, say, twelfth-grade reading level.

VLDL and LDL interfere with the quorum sensing system that upregulates genes required for invasive Staphylococcus aureus infection. The mechanism of antagonism entails binding ApoB, to a S. aureus autoinducer pheromone, preventing signaling through its receptor.

Surely I could follow the wikilinks and find out what all the jargon means, and rewrite it myself, but that would probably take a few hours, and it's time for dinner. -- Solo Owl 22:17, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Historic reasons?

However, primarily for historic reasons, cholesterol, and more specifically, LDL-cholesterol, remains the primary lipid test for the risk factor of atherosclerosis.

Which historic reasons? Are there any references about it? I had understood that it was because it's less costly to perform. Eyesighter (talk) 17:25, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Probably weasel words. But I happen to agree with them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.171.106.86 (talk) 20:07, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"mechanism that is not fully understood" implies causality and is inappropriate to use with "leads to". It is more appropriate to restrict any linkage to a simple association (association reference should be cited) until some causality is identified. I believe personally that neither ApoB (particle number) or LDL quantity can be causal since I have both ApoB and LDL extreme levels at five times the "recommended" levels and at age 68 have absolutely no artery disease. There are significant numbers of individuals just like me as shown in the Simon Broome registry of disease-free FH elderly individuals. Any explanation of "something else" occurring (genes, environment) simply means that the "something else" is likely the causal mechanism rather than either ApoB or LDL. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RockyBob (talk • contribs) 03:50, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How do you know you don't have a disease? How did you get tested for that? Blood tests? Ultrasound? Other imaging?

ee1518 (talk) 11:09, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Apolipoprotein B. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:56, 16 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]