Talk:Zinc

Edit request 9/27/13

zinc gluconate is discussed as a dietary supplement but it should be zinc glycinate which is far superior (see link), and readily available. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18271278

Dietary Reference Intakes

I am creating the same format for DRIs for vitamins and minerals. That is a U.S.- based system that identifies Estimated Average Requirements (EARs), Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDAs), Adequate Intakes (AIs) if there is not enough information to establish EARs and RDAs, and Tolerable Upper Intake Levels (ULs). Another major regulatory agency that has established ULs is the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). ULs for both are provided, as they often differ. If there is a UL (for some vitamins none has been determined) then rationale may be covered in a Toxicity section. In addition to DRIs, the U.S. also established Daily Values, using this on food and dietary supplement labels as % DV. Most of the DVs were revised in May 2016. What I have written can be improved. It lacks EFSA or other major country RDAs. It lacks an estimate of what percentages of people are deficient - although that is often covered in a separate section on deficiency and consequences of deficiency. I am creating this Subject in all of the Talk pages of the vitamin and mineral entries I have edited. Comments and improvements are welcome.David notMD (talk) 20:52, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Changed section to Dietary recommendations and added European Union information and citations.David notMD (talk) 12:07, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Split article to Zinc and Zinc in Biology?

Some of the other minerals that are also essential nutrients have concise content on the biological role of the mineral in the main article, with a redirect to a separate article: _______ in Biology. See Selenium as example. Zinc could benefit from such a split. I would do it but I have no experience in creating new articles.David notMD (talk) 12:10, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

@David notMD: As a WP:Featured article, this page needs to summarize all sub-articles about zinc, including Zinc sulfate (medical use) and Zinc deficiency (among others), per WP:SUMMARYSTYLE. Restructuring the article is always a possibility, but this article post-restructuring will need to appropriately summarize all relevant sub-articles. Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 01:58, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

100% agree. For the other minerals that are also essential nutrients there is concise content, usually under section title "Biological role", with a redirect to "____ in Biology" as the child article. This means there is also some duplication of content, but from WP:SUMMARYSTYLE it is clear that is allowed/recommended. David notMD (talk) 10:53, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Large expansion & restruc in biology and med

Recently, the article has been expandeed and restructured wrt == sections Aapplication, Biological role, Soil remediation, Precautions. Mostly by Doc James and Sepi333. See also previous talk #Split biology?.

As it stands now, I think the TOC shows that these topics (and their subsections) show repetition or being split over multiple sections. It also indicates that there may be too much detail. If large protion of medicine/bio aspects are to be included (limit? off-topic?), at least the top sections should be complete and non-repetitive. Say: Application, Biological, [Human?] Health/Medicine only. -DePiep (talk) 09:24, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

correct ping Doc James -DePiep (talk) 10:29, 11 January 2018 (UTC) Seppi333. -DePiep (talk) 10:32, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Might make sense to split off into a subarticle.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 13:32, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Sleep review

Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 00:58, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

References

The source for note 157 turns out to be a deadlink

It's been retracted by the journal which published it for plagiarism--A21sauce (talk) 16:04, 1 May 2018 (UTC)