Talk:Vitamin E/GA2

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: David notMD (talk · contribs) 21:12, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: ChopinChemist (talk · contribs) 16:54, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

I'll be happy to review this article. Let me know if you're ready for feedback. Given that the article has been reviewed before, my assessment will mostly based on what caused the article to fail in the last review and see if there are any other changes necessary. I may also ask you some questions regarding the article so I have a better understanding of what you're trying to convey. Note that the GA review process box above will not start until you're ready for feedback. ChopinChemist ^Talk? 16:54, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Previous GA

More coverage on other countries.

YProvided

'Function' section. Rationale: Anti-oxidant is buried while specific functions are spread out

YProvided

Current GA

MoS compliance

Lead section

Vitamin E is classified as an essential nutrient for humans... The first sentence should define what Vitamin E is and following that would be the sentence that determine its significance to humans (since Vitamin E is a human nutrient is pretty common knowledge)

(ex: Vitamin E is a group of eight molecular-structure related compounds that include four tocopherols and four tocotrienols. It functions as a fat-soluble antioxidant which may help protect cell membranes from reactive oxygen species, and is classified as an essential nutrients for humans... ).

Order of content in first paragraph of Lead revised. 09 Nov David notMD (talk) 14:35, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The lead section should also address function of tocotrienols, since the first two sentence of the article mentions tocopherols and tocotrienols but only address tocopherols' function. If no known function available then it should still be mentioned as such, but I highly doubt that's the case.
Declining use was theorized to be due to publications of meta-analyses that showed either no benefits or actual negative consequences from high-dose vitamin E.[8][9][10][11][12], :Try to specify which paper mentions no benefits to vitamin E and which mentions negative consequences. These two claims are pretty substantial so inline citation is a must.

Ref placement changed so as to distinguish between the refs that reported no benefits from those that documented negative consequences. David notMD (talk) 19:39, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Layout

The sections Serum content definitions of deficiency and Vaping-associated lung injury seems out of place and should be incorporated as follows: Serum content definitions of deficiency to Deficiency and Vaping-associated lung injury to Medical applications

Serum content definitions of deficiency incorporated into the Deficiency section. I disagree that Vaping-associated lung injury should be relocated to Medical applications, as MAs are intentions to prevent or treat, whereas vaping injuries was an unintended consequence of a manufacturing decision. David notMD (talk) 19:42, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Acknowledged. You should add a parenthetical expression for Vitamin E acetate since Vitamin E acetate it is only mentioned in that paragraph and it helps with minimizing confusion. If i'm correct then vitamin E acetate is similar to tocopheryl acetate, so here's an example to do so: "The CDC stated in February 2020 that previous research suggested inhaled vitamin E acetate (tocopheryl acetate)"ChopinChemist ^Talk? 03:33, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Section on Vaping-associated lung injury revised accordingly. Also, Wikilink to CDC shifted to first sentence. David notMD (talk) 11:51, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Words to watch

No words of concern

List incorporation

Appropriate use of lists

Citations

~~^{[non-primary source needed]} for For comparison, vitamin C remained constant and vitamin D increased by 454%. If addressed by source [60] nearby than you may delete this.~~ See comment below
There is evidence that use and sale of vitamin E supplements has decreased by up to 53% in the United States between about 1998 and 2006. This sentence is incorrect; it should be as follows per source: "There is evidence that the sale of vitamin E has decreased by up to 33% following a report showing little or no effect of vitamin E in preventing cancer and cardiovascular disease"

Text changed. David notMD (talk) 12:00, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence For comparison, vitamin C remained constant and vitamin D increased by 454% should be removed since the source:[1] only focus on active duty members and may not reflect society as a whole. The sentence is also inconsistent with the last, as 454% refers to increase is in Vitamin E prescription (use) rather than both prescription and sale, which is what the sentence before addresses.

sentence and ref removed. David notMD (talk) 12:00, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Add citation for the image showing synthesis of tocopheryl acetate (Synthesis>Biosynthesis) as there are many ways a compound can be synthesized. If no source is available then image should be removed.
Some references of concern: Ref [108] is from a Rolling Stone article, which is considered unreliable for political and social news . Suggested source to replace (from New England Journal of Medicine): https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa1916433 from New England Journal of Medicine.

Replaced RollingStone ref with NEJMed ref. David notMD (talk) 22:59, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Individual comments

Drug interactions

Consumption of alpha-tocopherol as a dietary supplement in amounts in excess of 300 mg/day may lead to interactions with aspirin, warfarin and cyclosporine A in ways that alter function.. Add tamoxifen per source: "Consumption of high-dose vitamin E supplements (≥ 300 mg/d), however, may lead to interactions with the drugs aspirin, warfarin, tamoxifen and cyclosporine A that may alter their activities "[2] and remove source [1] (Vitamin E fact sheet) since that source does not support the info above.

Dietary Recommendation

India recommends an intake of 8–10 mg/day. For all ages? If so then the detail should be included.

Sources

Remove: Worldwide, consumption is below recommendations according to a summary of more than one hundred studies that reported a median dietary intake of 6.2 mg per day for alpha-tocopherol.[4]. Already mentioned in "Dietary Rec." Also remove Palm oil is a source of tocotrienols.[17] as it seems out of place. Instead discuss if tocotrienols play a role in diet. Should incorporate into a separate table that describes natural source of tocotrienols, unless very few natural sources contain tocotrienols then you can list them in a sentence.

Removed text. Also removed from table the duplication of an entry for canola oil. Still need to address tocotrienol sources. David notMD (talk) 09:17, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is not enough information of tocotrienol sources to justify a table. Text and two refs copied from Tocotrienol. David notMD (talk) 03:10, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Medical applications

Expand Age-related macular degeneration section by following other section's style of writing. Example include starting with "A research showed..."

Text revised to provide more information on the nature of the reference and the conclusions of the review. David notMD (talk) 09:06, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@David notMD:More feedbacks coming soon. Also ping me if this is addressed.

Status changed to On hold.ChopinChemist ^Talk? 21:08, 12 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ChopinChemist I have addressed the initial set of comments and the follow-ups on those. Please ping me if there are more comments that will need to be addressed before making the GA review decision. David notMD (talk) 12:05, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

David notMD Overall you have done a great job at incorporating my feedback into the article. I did provide some more feedback and if you are able to address them at your convenience, then this article will definitely get a GA status.ChopinChemist ^Talk? 21:56, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]