Talk:John Harvey Kellogg/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Word choice[edit]

Inflicting them on others? I do not believe enemas are typically "inflicted", given would be a better word. If he did them without the permission of the reciever, then this would be the correct term. --[[User:OldakQuill|Oldak Quill]] 12:29, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Also it should be "enemata". But Wikipedia seems to prefer English plurals to Greek ones.

SimonTrew (talk) 20:48, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Autointoxication[edit]

this would be improved by a link to the etext of autointoxication. May I have permission to link it?

Who invented Corn Flakes?[edit]

I believe the inventor of cornflakes is an entirely different Kellogg. In fact, John Harvey Kellogg is over 50 years dead!

Not only did he invent corn flakes but also invented peanut butter. See the NPR story on him. Read the history of the Kellogg company and about the fight he had with his brother. Kellogg cornflakes have been around longer than 1993 which would be the 50th anniversary of his death. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 21:08, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

He didnt invent cereals for breakfast. Vegetarian breakfast was around since 1860's by the 7th day adventists. They ate gruel, porrige, farinas, and other boiled whole grain cereals. He let a batch overheat and the dry material became "corn flakes". --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 23:17, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

That Seventh-day Adventist you refer to is in fact Kellogg. This article doesn't particularly well express his involvement with the Seventh-day Adventist Church. MyNameIsNotBob 23:14, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Missing Key Fact[edit]

"John and Will eventually argued over the addition of sugar to the cereals and in 1906 Will started his own company called the Battle Creek Toasted Corn Flake Company, which eventually became the Kellogg Company. They never spoke to each other again." WHO WANTED TO ADD SUGAR AND WHO WANTED IT LEFT OUT? This is a key fact and it is missing. I imagine John wanted the sugar left out?--6/10/05

Well, its been about 3 months, and no clarification. Anyone know? Wendell 03:00, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you think about the contents of commercial corn flakes and contrast it with the bland fair peddled by John at the Battle Creek Sanitarium, it shuld be pretty obvious. Don't have a cite handy for it. older≠wiser 00:21, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as John Kellog's "Battle Creek Diet" was void of "all meat, alcohol, tea, coffee, tobacco, and chocolate, and only sparing use of eggs, milk, cheese, and refined sugar", so it's obviously Will who wanted to add the sugar. And indeed, his company still makes 'sugar Frosted Flakes™". I've corrected this in the article. T-bonham 22:24, 18 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

More on Corn Flakes[edit]

The breakfast_cereal article says "After leaving a batch of boiled wheat soaking overnight and rolling it out, {John} Kellogg had created wheat flakes. His brother Will Kellogg later invented corn flakes from a similar method". That statement is contridicted by this article which says "Today {John} Kellogg, a radical advocate of vegetarianism, is best known for the invention of the corn flake."

The corn flakes article says"history of corn flakes goes back to the late 19th century, when a group of Seventh-day Adventists began .... Members of the group experimented with a number of different grains, including wheat, oats, rice, and of course, corn. In 1894, Dr. John Harvey Kellogg, the superintendent of a sanitarium in Battle Creek, Michigan and an Adventist, used these recipes "

Which is correct? Wendell 02:56, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any discrepency. Read the next paragaph in the corn flakes article, which matches pretty closely with what's here. The section you quoted above is the context leading up to the discovery. older≠wiser 00:18, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

morbid antisexuality[edit]

I believe there is a tie-in between his cornflakes and his morbid antisexuality--didn't he bill the cereal as a good bland diet which would help keep the passions under control? (i.e. Your food is tasteless and will not titillate your senses; tasty food weakens your self-control, etc.)--6/10/05

that is an interesting idea.. however such speculation is probably in the realm of original research. --Paraphelion 18:09, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
This is a discussion page: original research and any reasonable ideas are welcome, whereas anal-retentiveness is not. 25.6.5 1,45

This is NOT speculation: It is well-attested and has been written about for years. The bland foods such as corn flakes, graham crackers etc. were made that way specifically so that they would be anaphrodesiacs. Spicy food stirred-up "animal passions"; bland, healthful food kept these passions at bay. If you want to read more about it, check "Innocent Ecstasy - How Christianity Gave America an Ethic of Sexual Pleasure" by Peter Gardella published in 1985 by Oxford University Press. He has a good bibliography if I remember rightly. You might also check out "Prophetess of Health" by Ronald L. Numbers, and "Manhood in America" by Michael Kimmel. Emyth 20:19, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All this from a man who was eager to squirt sticky white liquid into the rectums of his patients. Oh, the irony! --M.Neko 04:58, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

anti-masturbatory chemicals?[edit]

Do Kelloggs put anti-masturbatory chemicals in their corn flakes today? Since many companies can get away with having their secret ingredients, it seems reasonable to assume that kellogs either have done or are doing this insidious act. Coca-cola brand are notorious for their fungus substances in their phosphoric acid drink known as 'Coke'.

wtf? Sherurcij 13:36, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
That would be an urban legend then. Neither product legally contains any illegal contents today. If they did so, I don't know. But "secret ingredients" need to be listed just like anything else. What they are, exactly, and how they are combined (read: quantities) is the secret. -- 62.143.158.48 (talk) 15:07, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The question is utterly moot since the so called "secret anti-sex ingredient" in cornflakes and graham crackers was blandness of flavor. These guys believed that strong and interesting flavors in foods triggered sexual urges, so they created diets that were the opposite of that in taste. Koala Tea Of Mercy (KTOM's Articulations & Invigilations) 00:03, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Religion[edit]

It seems to me there really ought to be discussion of his role in the Adventist church, which I believe initially kicked him out for not titheing 10% of his profits to the church, but today considers him one of their most famous Adventists, even naming a building at Walla Walla College after him. Sherurcij 13:37, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There is an important story here about Kellogg's relationship with the Adventists. Originally hailed by Ellen Gould White as virtually her successor or, at least, closest adviser, there ultimately developed a rift between them as an aging White came more under the control of Adventist hierophants and would-be theocrats, while his own professional position was being undermined by the development of more scientific forms of medicine, increasingly advocated by many of his own students. This eventually led to the discrediting of Kellogg within the Adventist leadership and his expulsion from the church. An attempt was made to wrest control of Battle Creek Clinic from him, which, I believe, failed. At Battle Creek, Kellogg trained young men he called "Medical Evangelists". Originally the clinic exercise coaching staff, some of these men became increasingly interested in medicine. Eventually, Kellogg established an education program at the clinic, which graduated a number of "doctors". I believe this started around 1896. The turn of the century was a chaotic time in American medicine, with quacks galore and much emerging social pressure against bad treatments. A number of Kellogg's students separated themselves from Kellogg's hydrotherapy and other "holistic" practices and were chartered by the General Conference of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church as the "College of Medical Evangelists". These are the men who went on to found the great (really) Adventist medical college at Loma Linda, CA. I regret that I do not have references or details for most of this; however, I will willingly correspond with anyone who would like to follow on these leads. The most authoritative information is probably a book "The College of Medical Evangelists", published some time in the '60s, I believe, or maybe the 70's. There are also a number of "white papers" (no pun intended) about the "Kellogg Rebellion" that may be found in back issues of Adventist Spectrum and various on-line sources, primarily related to the Urantia Book (which was organized and published by Dr. W.S.Sadler, Jr., a student of Dr. Kellogg, who married one of his adopted daughters, Lena Kellogg (Sadler). Both separated from Adventism and were known as leaders of the eugenics movement and the author of many popular books on medical and health topics.) To correspond, send email to ldmjr@comcast.net. I may register in the future. This is only the second input I've made in 18 months! ///// Wow! I forgot I posted that. Here's my signature to link it with any other stuff I own up to writing. Ldmjr (talk) 04:26, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is an important story here, but the one before begins with a biase and half truth. The use of the phrase "hierophants and would be theocrats" shows this bias. Those individuals may have existed as describes but we are not to judge 100 years latter whether they in fact fit that description. EGW did not develop a rift with Kellogg because the church came to control her more. It's because he continued ignoring her advice about working so much and he promoted pantheistic ideas (a no no for SDA's). The men you refer to that founded Loma Linda would be Percy T. Magan and others. References could come from various books on SDA history such as George Knight's "A Brief History of Seventh Day Adventists". Kellogg continued to have a rift with the church do to issues relating to A.T. Jones and E.J. Wagoner. He was supportive of their 1888 Message which many church leaders were strongly against and also was with them in their battles regarding church organization which led to the defeat of their ideas in the SDA church. Furthermore, he tried to take control of the Battle Creek SDA church and the Battle Creek Sanitarium for use of its facility and almost succeeded. This created an even great rift between him and the church. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fountainviewkid (talk • contribs) 19:13, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Name of the institution he created[edit]

Why does someone insist on using the middle of the three names for the institution that Kellogg created even though it is most popularly known as the Battle Creek Sanitarium? Ansell 01:02, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what you mean by the "middle of the three names", but sanatorium is the spelling Kellogg (and the institution) used, and evidently the somewhat idiosyncratic spelling was deliberately chosen. older ≠ wiser 01:11, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The article says that it was founded as "Western Health Reform Institute", but apparently was named Battle Creek Sanatorium, even though it is now popularly referred to as Battle Creek Sanitarium. The fact that the name seems to be in the middle of the three known names in chronological order was what I meant by that. Could you provide an official quote stating that its name was officially known as that, because all the quotes I have ever seen about the place have been under the common name, including all of the references and wikilinks that haven't been changed by you. Ansell 01:25, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I found this quote [1] that uses three different terms for the one institution, given that it was a report from 1904 it hardly says that only one was recognised by the citizens of the day. Ansell 01:33, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, looks like I may have gotten things confused. I had done a bit of research awhile back on the history of the Hart-Dole-Inouye Federal Center and had it on my list of articles to develop, but never came back to it. Then in the interim, an article was created at Battle Creek Sanitarium which escaped my attention until I happened to notice this edit by an anon. It struck me as odd and some very quick searches and a look at Sanatorium led me to misremember something I had read in the Hart-Dole-Inouye center history. Anyhow, it probably should go back to the "sanitarium" spelling. older ≠ wiser 02:44, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Cool, I will move it back and rearrange the names in the introduction to indicate the difference. BTW, Sorry but my hasty linking of multiple {{fact}} tags. I get carried away sometimes. Will use the above sources to avoid future misunderstandings. Ansell 03:21, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Formating[edit]

Bkonrad: First, there is nothing un-American about the format dd Mmmmm yyyy. It gets used many places; and, if you'll notice how Wikipedia (an American website) itself time-stamps things by default (as at the end of comments), you'll see that it uses dd Mmmmm yyyy. Second, go to your own talk page, use the “+” tab to create a section with a header, and then after it's created, go back and look at the mark-up created by Wikipedia — notice that there is a blank-line after the section header. Further, that blank line, while being transparent to users, helps editors quickly locate headers and sections. Now, I'll wait for your reply before doing any reversion, as you might have some good counter-arguments. But if you don't provide them then I'll feel free to revert. —SlamDiego 05:34, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The references to timestamps are irrelevant as the format is determined by the system -- that some of the servers are physically located in the U.S. is also besides the point. dd Mmmmm yyyy is a relatively uncommon date format in the U.S. Just as with British/U.S. spelling differences, there are differences in how dates are presented. Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)#Date formats related to topics indicates that editors may choose to use the date format for that country. Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings)#Spaces indicates that spaces following a heading are "completely optional". I find that having the space before the heading is more than sufficient to help in locating the headers and find the extra space is an annoyance. older ≠ wiser 13:14, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The first issue isn't whether the format is required; it is whether it is alien (as you insist); the referential time-stamps refute your claim that the dd Mmmmm yyyy format alien to America. The very section of the Manual of Style that you cite goes on to indicate that dd Mmmmm yyyy is an acceptable format for articles about America. You are indeed correct that spaces following a heading are “completely optional”, but it is, further, against Wikipdedia policy to make edits that are no more than removal of optional things, inserted by another editor in the course of some larger process, simply because you don't like them. If you can give good counter-arguments, then please do so. —SlamDiego 02:13, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Your wasting each other's time. No matter which format you use, the way it displays is based on your chosen preference settings. Cheers. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 04:59, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Richard, that's only true for people who have preferences set, which in turn requires an account, which most users don't have. —SlamDiego 06:36, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
"Alien" is your word, not mine. I said it is an uncommon format in the U.S. and I stand by that. Besides changing needlessly changing the default date formats, you also added numerous pointless links to year-only dates. It was the combination of both of those factors that motivated my edits. Now we just seem to be stuck in a pissing match. You can continue to restore your preferred date format if you like, as will I. older ≠ wiser 16:10, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Klismaphilia[edit]

Is the Klismaphilia 'see also' link of any purpose other than to poke fun at Dr. Kellogg? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by The Storm Surfer (talk • contribs) 01:44, 18 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

If there is no sourced evidence provided to justify including a link to Klismaphilia in this article, I will remove it. Any further attempts to add the link back in without supporting evidence will be taken as evidence of bad faith. --Nonstopdrivel 19:21, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good point. There is no evidence to my knowledge that Kellogg had other than health concerns motivating his practice, and considering the dietary practices of the day, it was often a good idea in the extreme cases he saw. Extreme situations can demand extreme actions. That doesn't justify making it a lifestyle. If the lifestyle is correct, regular enemas and such should become unnecessary. They are a self-perpetuating and deleterious practice making themselves necessary, since they destroy normal peristaltic function, thus they should be the exception, not the rule (as proposed by quacks, salespersons, and believers in mucoid plaque. Delete it straight away. The burden of proof for inclusion is on the one making the inclusion. -- Fyslee/talk 21:47, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Place of Birth[edit]

I've changed his place of birth to Tyrone, Michigan. The 1850 US Federal Census places his family in Tyrone, Livingston County, Michigan. John Harvey was born two years later and the family had moved to Battle Creek by the 1860 Census. I believe the NY Times Obituary citing his place of birth in New York to be an error. Swango 04:39, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, I didn't see your comment here before I changed it back. I'll fix it. older ≠ wiser 10:38, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent detective work, you should load the census images, and add this as a case study on the page of errors in mainstream media corrected by Wikipedia. I have found a half dozen errors in Britannica and other reference works where they based the age of movie stars on their Hollywood press kits, and I corrected from the SSDI --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 15:25, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Richard - I believe the images I used would be considered copywright protected as they belong to Ancestry, although I would be happy to provide citation information. Also, I'm not sure where this project you refer to resides. Swango 02:41, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The images do not belong to Ancestry, they belong to the government for which Ancestry has indexed and scanned the government microfilm. All official federal documents prepared by government workers are in the public domain. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 15:55, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Views on sexuality"[edit]

An anonymous editor (15 Jan 2009, 07:06) changed the section header "Views on sexual health" to "Views on sexuality", with this summary line: sexual *health* was only the means to cover up his perversions. he and his apologists may disagree, but in fact his views are on *sexuality*, not on sexual *health*.

It seems more in keeping with NPOV if we take an author's works at their face value. Making our own analysis of his psychological motivations seems to violate "no original research". I recommend reverting the header to reflect the prima facie subject of Kellogg's works. OTOH, if there are published sources critiquing Kellogg's works on sex from a psychological point of view, that could provide useful material for this article. Chonak (talk) 00:27, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think "views on sexuality" is reasonable; it doesn't in itself suggest that he did anything with an ulterior motive. The interesting phrase is an "an advocate of sexual abstinence", which was added to ensure his ideas were not being simply attacked - someone writing about Karl M. Baer has actually assumed that this was Kellogg's description of himself.Billwilson5060 (talk) 10:57, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Broken links[edit]

Some references are no longer reachable, as there is no functioning web server at "coastalfields.com" at present. Please update where possible. Chonak (talk) 00:27, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Carbolic acid?[edit]

I couldn't find the quote about (or indeed any reference to) applying carbolic acid to females' genitals in 'Plain Facts for Old and Young'. Is this quote taken from another source or is it erroneous?

Also, 'Plain Facts for Old and Young' doesn't seem to make any reference to sewing boys' foreskins closed. Does anyone have a source for this rumour? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.19.60.85 (talk) 06:27, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The two are mentioned back to back in this edition: [2]. It was reprinted several times with more "facts", so some will have been added later on - this print is from 1895.


They have been commented on at various secondary sources, e.g. [3] Billwilson5060 (talk) 21:21, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The "carbolic acid" quote is not present in earlier editions but is certainly found on p. 326 of the revised 1910 edition of Plain Facts.
https://archive.org/stream/plainfactsforold00kell#page/326/mode/2up Muzilon (talk) 04:20, 27 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Selected books[edit]

Is there any reason The Natural Diet of Man isn't included? Vegetarianism was a big part of Kellogg's ideas... (Admittedly it's hard to read and includes a lot of truly bizarre claims, but I think it's still relevant.) 128.194.250.122 (talk) 06:42, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reference for yogurt enemata: copyvio?[edit]

I've found a reference for the yogurt at museumofquackery.com. The text in this section appears to have been largely taken verbatim from that site (unless it was the other way around). if the first is the case, this would seem to be a copyright violation.

I haven't time to look into this now as I am editing the Hungarian translation, but perhaps another editor would like to check it. As of now, it is reference 6. Monkap (talk) 11:51, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Asexual[edit]

I note the that John Harvey Kellogg is noted as an "asexual" in the groups. evidence? He did try to discourage sexual activity but that necessarily meant that he was asexual.Phil Nolte (talk) 14:28, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A book offered on Amazon.com can be purchased relating to Asexual history and famed asexual persons; John Harvey Kellogg is one such person featured. Also, take into mind that he and his wife never had sex, and adopted all of their children. He was merely asexual before the term was coined. [http://www.amazon.com/Asexual-People-Kellogg-Bradford-Poundstone/dp/1155827422/ref=wl_it_dp_o?ie=UTF8&coliid=IYWOHU1YZVSWI&colid=2GY6ZD02CSG4V The link can be found here.](Tigerghost (talk) 11:46, 14 June 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Article a bit unbalanced[edit]

There seems to be a somewhat disproportionate focus on his views on sexuality, which strikes me as a bit sensationalizing. Not that any of it should be removed; but there should definitely be more on his views on diet and digestive health -- he wrote *far* more on that topic, and IIRC was better known for his opinions on it; this article rather presents the opposite weighting, giving the sexuality stuff its own section but putting the diet stuff in with the Battle Creek Sanitarium. Vultur (talk) 00:07, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not my impression, it comes pretty late in the article. In fact his views on sexuality could certainly be mentioned in the introduction or in the section explaining his adventist views. But nobody prevents you if you want to contribute more on his diet science and other topics. Richiez (talk) 10:37, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Enema use[edit]

There is another issue relating to sensationalism over his use of enemas – there is a primary source here [4] (also here[5]) that, reiterating something from the later edition of Plain Facts, takes on someone “styling himself Dr. A. Wilford Hall” who had recommended the use of a bulb syringe for evacuation, which Kellogg condemns except “when they are not emptied by the unaided efforts of nature”. It also gives his preferred “nutritive enema” when necessary as bromose and egg not yoghurt. Billwilson5060 (talk) 15:27, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My fave line from the movie:

  • William Lightbody: Oh, no, no, I can't eat fifteen gallons of yoghurt.
  • Dr. John Harvey Kellogg: Oh, it's not going in that end, Mr. Lightbody.

How many adopted children?[edit]

The article states that he and his wife legally adopted 7 children, but the following sentence lists 8 names. Emika22 (talk) 09:20, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Radium cure[edit]

Kellogg was an early advocate of radium cures; in 1912, his sanatorium was reportedly the first in USA to offer the therapy. This ought to be mentioned. Hexmaster (talk) 10:49, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mentally Ill[edit]

Kellogg was obviously a sociopath. This article leans too heavily to the positive. Change it or I will call out the bias. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.194.128.108 (talk) 00:52, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia relies on reliable sourced material. It comes as no surprise that great people can be ill mentally. Obviously, if Kellogg had such an illness, it did not detract from his tremendous accomplishments. Are there reliable sources which can support the claim that JHK suffered from a mental illness? DonaldRichardSands (talk) 17:24, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Peanut butter[edit]

Neither John Harvey Kellogg (in spite of his audacious patent)nor George Washington Carver "invented" peanut butter because it's known that the ancient Inca's already had it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.162.133.112 (talk) 15:54, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This sentence doesn't make sense[edit]

"He was an especially zealous campaigner against this was an orthodox view during his lifetime, especially the earlier part."

I know better than to waste time changing it, so I just wanted to mention it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.199.6.126 (talk) 10:31, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Medical patents and inventions[edit]

I'm part of the course 140.106, and I'm planning to expand on the "Patents and inventions" section. JHK is known to have patented and invented many therapeutic devices including light and electrotherapies, e.g. a picture of his radiant heat bath is already pictured in the article. Vfang3 (talk) 18:51, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't received any feedback on this section from peers in 140.106, but this is me checking in! If anyone does have comments about the expanded Medical patents and inventions section, they would be much appreciated. Vfang3 (talk) 16:35, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative views[edit]

I'm also part of the course 140.106, and my group and I are thinking about expanding on Kellogg's alternative medicine views, including hydropathy, tobaccoism, and massage. ArjavS (talk) 03:31, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I will be expanding this topic to also include his ideas of health and 'biologic living.' ArjavS (talk) 18:16, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll talk about massage Haley Wendt (talk) 20:49, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Being a part of the course 140.106, I have been assigned to complete a "Did You Know?" section. Did you know: Kellogg published The Uses of Water in Health & Disease where he detailed the benefits of hydropathy. The chemical and physical properties of water lent its ability for its healing properties including cooling functions for fevers and functions as a tonic among many other functions. Kellogg believed in the curative properties of water, but disapproved it as a "one-size fits all" property. (Diegoluytoto (talk) 06:21, 12 March 2017 (UTC))[reply]

Recent edit regarding Hydropathy[edit]

I think the recent edit did a very good job in introducing the hydropathic side of Kellogg. It was also very well organized and divided up into three sections. However, I thought including more detail regarding the subject would definitely help. For example on the Remedial Properties of Water section, it is not well explained why Kellogg thought that water could be a "gentle" substance to induce vomiting, and the "violent and unpleasant symptoms" the purgatives cause are not described. Thus, it makes it confusing to know for sure what the benefits of water is over other substances. Also in the Incorrect uses of Water Cure section, it is not very well explained why aspects such as electricity was important. Also, if the author wanted to talk about excessive hydropathy and its resemblance with heroic medicine, it would have been nice to demonstrate more on why hydropathy was still beneficial, although sometimes being aggressive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhk0308 (talk • contribs) 04:23, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review/Feedback[edit]

Hi! I looked through the edits, I think someone from course 104.106 focused on the Views on Health section which is what I am specifically reviewing. The article as a whole looks great! It is well-sourced and organized so it is easy to find information. Good job! The section on Biologic Living is very clear and easy to read. It gives a nice summary of what is to come. The Views on tobacco is well written and has a lot of information. Is it possible to find more information about what he specifically did in his committees? In the Views on alcohol and other beverages section, could you give more information about research specifically he was looking at? Can you put a citation on this sentence, "Even moderate drinkers were subject to these effects, as Kellogg felt that a poison was a poison in all doses."? Can you reference your source for the last three sentences here as they seem very factual and based in other sources- "In 1878, John Harvey Kellogg, along with Ellen White, the founder of the Seventh-Day Adventists, and several others, had organized the American Health and Temperance Organization. The goal of this organization was to expose the far-reaching dangers of tobacco, alcohol, tea, and coffee. For the 15 years that the organization persisted, Kellogg remained as its president." Overall, a very easy to follow, clear, concise, and informative article. Lwebb15 (talk) 17:40, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback! There was very little information as to what was actually discussed in the committees. In fact, there was not much more information than mentions of the committees in several books. I will definitely make the citations changes. ArjavS (talk) 20:46, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:John Harvey Kellogg/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Carbrera (talk · contribs) 02:04, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Overall[edit]

I'm sorry to come to this conclusion so quickly, but this article needs a lot of additional work before reaching the GA status.

  • Large amounts of this article are unsourced; in fact, almost every section contains paragraphs without references
  • Additionally, this article relies far too much on block quotes rather than textual evidence found elsewhere
  • This is an easy fix, but the lead should cover all major topics discussed within the article itself, so it needs to be expanded because at its current state it is quite lacking
  • Some of the language/diction in this article seems to be written more like an essay:
  • "The issues that had been simmering came..."
  • "Kellogg was not only a physician, surgeon, author, and administrator, but also an inventor."
  • This article also includes various tags such as "This section needs expansion" and "This section does not cite any source", which is enough to fail the article during a GAR anyway.

I would like to see what this article could come to in the future, so please continue working on it! Please ping with me any additional help and/or questions; I'd be glad to answer them to the best of my abilities. This article is just a bit too far away from the necessary criterion at the moment. Regards, Carbrera (talk) 02:39, 22 March 2017 (UTC).[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Harvey Kellogg. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 23:30, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John Harvey Kellogg. 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, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 22:49, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:John_Harvey_Kellogg/Archive_1&oldid=1136849612"