Talk:Allostatic load

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 16 September 2020 and 25 November 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Angelicaba.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 13:54, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

How measured

Is there a reliable and valid method of measuring allostatic load? What is it? Is there adequate evidence for the construct validity of this notion? This article is sort of pathetic until these questions are answered. 69.108.167.242 (talk) 19:43, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

It's me again. I just looked over the most prominent PubMed abstracts related to "allostatic load." They are pretty scanty. I don't see any suggestion of a standardized method for measuring allostatic load, nor any discussion of reliability or validity of such a measurement. I don't see any discussion of construct validity. As far as I can tell, allostatic load is a speculative notion, vaguely congruent with "stress," in search of an empirical foundation. 69.108.167.242 (talk) 19:49, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello, 69.108.167.242. It is my understanding that "allostatic load" does not necessitate measures of empirical quantification, but rather is often proposed as an alternative to conceptions of neurological and physiological functions which are based on the notion that such processes are most effectively quantified through average or baseline measurements, instead favoring a dynamical approach. Perhaps the article would be well-suited to be phrased in a way which is more explicitly theoretical and sensitive to the context of its application in the sciences.

Perhaps you are correct in calling it "speculative," although this largely depends on the circumstances of its use; in any case, why do you feel this article is "sort of pathetic," and what steps can be taken to improve it? At the moment I am getting the impression that you object to the subject of the article in principle, rather than finding the article itself to be inaccurate or misrepresentative. Cheers, Memtgs (talk | contribs) @ 05:17, 6-06-2013 UTC 05:17, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

In the 1850's the Origin of Species was considered equally, if not more, speculative. I do encourage the original author to consider using a different word to replace "turbulences." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.117.171.0 (talk) 20:15, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Combine Allostasis and Allostatic Load

I was looking at Allostasis and Allostatic load. Should these articles be combined? Emwhitaker (talk) 20:43, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Stress-performance-graph-sm.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:21, 16 October 2018 (UTC)

Full of problems

tons of OR and commentary. use of "you" and "we" etc. Needs very careful review to remove all the gunk. Jytdog (talk) 15:46, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Redundantcy

Some please edit the opening few paragraphs to remove obviousl redundant sentences.

I really like this article but the editing makes Wikipedia look bad. RRTripp10 (talk) 08:48, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

The intro (or lede) is a summary of the article. It should contain info that is redundant in the later part of the article. – The Grid (talk) 16:29, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Neuroscience

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 August 2023 and 18 December 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): LundyLoo (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Mpiard, Organizedchaos39, BrownBoy1999.

— Assignment last updated by BrownBoy1999 (talk) 04:21, 27 October 2023 (UTC)