Talk:Food reward

From Citizendium
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is developed but not approved.
Main Article
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition The brain mechanisms involved in reinforcing feeding behaviour. [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup category Health Sciences [Editors asked to check categories]
 Talk Archive none  English language variant British English
Sarah Smith 14:43, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Stefanie Maroudi Manta 18:22, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Juliet Carmichael 22:09, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Sarah Mee 13:30, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Good start. Might like to take a look at this recent paper in PNAS (definitely a top journal) Jerlhag E, Egecioglu E, Landgren S, Salomé N, Heilig M, Moechars D, Datta R, Perrissoud D, Dickson SL, Engel JA.Requirement of central ghrelin signaling for alcohol reward. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2009 Jul 7;106(27):11318-23. Epub 2009 Jun 29. PMID 19564604 Gareth Leng 09:35, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Remember, the 4 of you need to contribute! Celine Caquineau 09:34, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

How's the article going on? any plans yet?Celine Caquineau 14:19, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I haven't posted yet, am working on my part of the article and was planning on finishing it before posting it? It should be up by the end of the week. Article is coming on nicely, we have split it into various subheadings which we are tackling independently. We are meeting this weekend to bring it all together.Juliet Carmichael 14:39, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Hey guys! Have put up all my stuff...i wasn't sure exactly what to write for the endocannabinoid/opioid systems...give it a read and see what u think (add/delete accordingly...). Also having a bit of trouble with the formatting...will see what i can do.Juliet Carmichael 21:06, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Your article so far: Overall I can see that you have done loads of work. It’s a complex and vast subject and you are dealing well with it with interesting points covered. It seems your group shows good team work with everybody contributing. Well done!

However, I would advise you to slightly reorganize your article. For now it stands more like a series of articles rather than one. I’ve noticed repetitions between the first sections and it would be helpful to have, early on, an idea of the overall direction and focus of the article. So I suggest that in the introduction you start by defining important concepts such as reward, reinforcement … you can then link them with Food and mention pathways involved (dopamine, opioids, cannabinoids…). Then you can develop the concepts in different sections like you have done. This should help the understanding by all readers.

My other comment will be on the writing style, remember that it’s for an encyclopaedia, the reading should flow easily, use simple sentences and add transition links between paragraphs. You are linking your facts/ studies with references in the text, well done but remember to use the Citizendium format, I’ve done it for a couple of references in your article, have a look how I’ve done it (in part 6). Finally remember to upload the bibliography page with the papers from the ‘References’ section.

Im looking forward to see how your article will develop, keep an eye on the other articles, they might be talking about things to link in your article! Have a look at Solinas M (2008) 'The endocannabinoid system in brain reward processes.' PMID 18414385 that might be helpful for your last section. Celine Caquineau 12:35, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Hey guys, I think that the section about obesity needs to go at the end, right? And also, after the section of reinforcement, at the start, we can put a more general heading, like, 'Food Reward Systems' and then put each of your parts as subheadings. It will be more organised like that, and at the end the obesity part. Is everyone ok with that?

Well done so far. What about "food addiction"? Gareth Leng 15:13, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Very good article. You have include a lot of information, at points maybe a bit too much. The task is to create an encyclopedia article so try to avoid the use of too many complex terms. I think a diagram illustrating the "critical dopaminergic pathway" would help illustrate this section well and may help you cut down on your word count. Good use of table summarising the summary of centrally administered insulin and leptin on reward behaviours. But overall really good, you have clearly researched a lot into this topic. Amelia Sheldon 15:20, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

This is good stuff, though some of the sections are a bit chunky. You've organised it well though, and there are a huge amount of references! well done. Neil R. J. Watson 15:54, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

this was a good read, although a couple of bits needed re-reading to make sure i got it, maybe a bit of editing to make it flow that little bit smoother? Robert Parsons 10:25, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

A really good article. Nicely laid out too. Just a suggestion . . you use quite a lot of abbreviations, maybe as well as explaining what they are in the text you could have an abbreviation section with a list of the abbreviations you use. It would mean for forgetful people like me, there is a quick reference there to remind me what I'm reading? Lowri Phillips 12:14, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

A very interesting page to read, as others have said lots and lots of information but laid out well in clearly defined sections. A good number of references show the work you have put in, and I liked the use of the table. If you could possibly insert a diagram or two then it would look even better, but overall good work!--Bruce Traven McLintock 13:02, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

It's very good... There's quite alot of information to take in so it might be worth doing a summary of findings? Or you could adapt your intro slightly ie. i noticed that it mentions that 'wanting' is predominantly controlled by dopamine secreted in PFC, amygdala, hypothalamus and projection from VT to NAc... However you later concluded that mesolimbic pathways (particularly VTA-NAc) modulates motivation and evaluation of reward like stimuli and it's actually the SNpc-CPu projections that are essential for motivation and 'wanting'.. (I think - i may have got the wrong end of the stick!). I also got a little bit confused as you said that dopamine pathways are not so much involved in 'liking' but then you said that the mesolimbic dopamine pathways are responsible for 'liking'/learning - that was at the beginning. Sorry for all this waffle and feel free to ignore it - it's probably just me confusing myself as per usual! 'Emily Moore 19:32, 4 November 2009 (UTC)'

This is a very interesting article and well laid out. You have organised it well, but I agree that some of the paragraphs are very long and full of lots of information - maybe you could use a couple of images to break it up a bit? Great work though. Katie Rowland 23:26, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

+ Do you guys know what the picture is at the bottom ofthe webpage?? Sarah Mee 17:11, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Well done, you've done a great job! This is a really complex subject and you've dealt well with it. I appreciate that you've taken on board previous comments. Good illustrations too. Good article. Celine Caquineau 13:00, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

I found this article really interesting, especially as there is so much controversy in the litterature and a lot of things still remain unclear. I found your diagrams and figures especially helpfull as well as all the examples and studies you've included to illustrate your points. You're structure and topics covered related to food reward link well together and makes it pleasant to read. Katie Gallagher 16:39, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


Well done; this is a complex task, and you've done an excellent job in collating and reviewing a good selection of the literature in a well planned and fluently written article. A lot of work here, and a lot of thoughtGareth Leng 16:31, 22 November 2009 (UTC)


Good to see you back, Gareth. I see you are removing some text; should you be rewarded with a biscuit, or did you just take one out of the article? Howard C. Berkowitz 19:13, 14 March 2010 (UTC)