Talk:Typhus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Lethal Disease?
can you die of this if you did not get the right medical treatment?
nope -- many people, particularly in poor areas of the world, or in areas undergoing military conflict, live. It was a major cause of death in concentration camps in WWII, for example see Concentration camp Theresienstadt. It appears that a history section is needed in our article. Prevention -- good food, clean water, bedding and housing -- is the primary defense, but modern medicine provides good treatment and most people survive. See [1] for general overview. WBardwin 23:27, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
yes, especially in undeveloped countries.
Just like Anne frank. speaking of anne frank someone should put a link to anne frank Ricky Ricky 00:29, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Merge?
See Epidemic typhus article. Should we combine? WBardwin
Yes, definitelyBlaise 11:38, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ancient Athens
In the history of the disease, there is no reference in the epidemic of ancient Athens, around 429 BC, which also killed Pericles. Most researchers now agree that this epidemic was typhus. Shouldn't this information be added in the article? --Yannismarou 12:06, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
- Yannismarou, I believe that you found and edited Plague of Athens, so you may have noticed that both typhus and typhoid are the current front runners for the causes of the epidemic. If editors here want to have a paragraph about the plague and modern research, I would be happy to help draft it. WBardwin 20:34, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
I hope that this shall happen and I add that two very important researchers and interpretators of Thucydides' history (Vlachos and Gomme) believe that typhus was the cause of the epidemic. --Yannismarou 12:03, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- Do you have sources (internet or paper) for Vlachos and Gomme? First names? Thanks. WBardwin 02:43, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
What I do know:
- Angelos Vlachos (Άγγελος Βλάχος) (member of the Academy of Athens and diplomat), "Remarks on Thoucydides" (written n Greek: Παρατηρήσεις στο Θουκυδίδη), 1992, Volume I, pages 177-178: "Today,according to Gomme, it is generally acceptable that it was typhus" ("Σήμερα, όπως γράφει ο Gomme, έχει γίνει από όλους παραδεκτό ότι ήταν τύφος).
- Vlachos, referring to Gomme, means a monumental work of A.W.Gomme, "Historic Comments on Thucydides" (Unfortunately, I donot possess it), complemented after Gomme's death by A. Andrews and K.J. Dover.
I hope I have helped somehow!--Yannismarou 11:16, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- OK? edit the paragraph if you like. WBardwin 22:19, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
The Pandemic article states that definitive evidence was found that this epidemic was caused by typhoid fever. The Typhoid Fever article states doubts about this evidence. I believe the Bubonic Plague article make similar claims. If there is uncertainty to the cause, that should be reported in each article, as well as Epidemic and List of epidemics, rather than having each article state something different. 68.239.129.42 18:09, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Typhus in World War II
...Even though it must be expected that the figures given in this report might be exaggerated, the fact that Polish underground fighters caused some casualties to the German occupational forces is indubitable, and even though such guerilla warfare against an occupational power is illegal, one cannot blame the Poles morally for waging such a war against what they conceived to be an illegal occupation. What is of interest here is the penultimate page of this report, which lists under "3. Activities of retaliation":
"Typhoid fever microbes and typhoid fever lice: in a few hundred cases"
Aspects of Biological Warfare During World War II-- contributed unsigned by 198.54.202.82 (15 June 2006)
Typhus and Typhoid fever are two distinct diseases, but this external link doesn't seem to understand the difference. The quotation above accurately reflects the web site quoted. Even though typhus was a major killer in WWII, I would say this external site is not dependable enough, without reference to another source. WBardwin 21:48, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
DDT was developed during WW2, not between WW1 and WW2. 159.105.80.141 11:03, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Was ther any attempt in WW2 to let the Red Cross, etc use DDT to combat typhus in German camps, etc? There were enough negotiations going on behind the scenes to alert the Allies that millions were dying of typhus - why no action. The discovery of massive deths after the war almost seems feigned by Eisenhower etc.159.105.80.141 11:41, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] vaccinations?
Are they still recommended for everywhere in the world?
[edit] Faked Polish Typhus Epidemic in WW II
In 1942, Dr. Eugeniusz Lazowski and Dr. Stanisław Matulewicz used the Proteus_OX19 bacterium - which gave a false positive to the most common typhus screening method of the time, the Weil-Felix test - to fool the occupation German authorities into believing a Typhus epidemic existed in the Polish town of Rozwadow. I'm wondering if there should be mention made of this somewhere in this article? Johnmc 17:06, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] From "Talk:Endemic typhus"
I mistakenly moved Endemic typhus to Murine typhus when what is required is a redirect in the other direction, since Murine typhus is a form of endemic typhus and currently doesn't jusify a separate article. I'm trying to find an admin to fix this problem. If I can't, I will post on Wikipedia:Requested moves. --Viriditas | Talk 06:39, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] From "Talk:Epidemic typhus"
[edit] Merge?
See Typhus article. Should we combine? WBardwin 03:35, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I think it's an eminently good idea, though I'd prefer not to lose information in the process :) It's really a part of what one would look at typhus, and seeing other types of typhus provides good context for people looking up epidemic typhus. And they are highly related diseases. FYI, I don't think these pages have much in common as far as information so a merge is going to have lots of simple copy/paste :) It's already kind of a subsidiary article. Jkeiser 17:09, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
- I don't think that is a very good idea. They are very diffrent articles.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.236.202.13 (talk • contribs). 28 August 2006
-
-
-
- Merge, obviously. Vidor 15:42, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
Yes, I think it reasonable to merge all the typhus articles into one .. I think separating them all is too pedantic--Doctorpete 10:14, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Endemic typhus
Should Endemic typhus be merged too?—68.239.129.42 03:09, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
- Yes that page is just a stub now, and would not hurt either articles.--DO11.10 00:12, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
