Talk:Deepak Chopra

1. Redirect Template:Dated maintenance category

Lede

I am very much not a Chopra defender, but the last sentence of the lede paragraph, splicing quotes from several opinion pieces, seems like an attempt to get as close as possible to stating subjective views in Wikivoice. It also focuses onky on Quantum Healing, only one of many topics Chopra has discussed. I would suggest replacing that sentence with a more general “Chopra’s views have been characterized as pseudoscientific and devoid of substance” Mach61 (talk) 04:53, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

It was also added by a banned editor (Roxy the Dog) Mach61 (talk) 05:05, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Irrelevant. Check the reason for the ban. It is not his opposition to fringe ideas. --Hob Gadling (talk) 06:34, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Template:Tq By that reasoning, we would have to delete almost everything from almost all Wikipedia articles.

Template:Tq Ask any scientist. Chopra's babble will infuriate pretty much all of them. The "have been characterized as" sentence is representative.

Having said that, you are right that they do not belong in the lede. The lede is supposed to summarize the body of the article, and those quotes are not there. They should be moved to the body and replaced in the lede by a moved-up sentence from the third paragraph Template:Tq, with "and devoid of substance" at the end. --Hob Gadling (talk) 06:34, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

FYI: My problem was the fact the sentence spliced quotes without attribution, not that opinion pieces in RS were cited at all. I don’t mean to start an argument with someone who agrees with my proposed change, but please assume editors are familiar with basic rules unless definitively proven otherwise. Cheers. Mach61 (talk) 15:42, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

Agree that, this last sentence "His discussions of quantum healing have been characterized as technobabble – "incoherent babbling strewn with scientific terms" derided by those proficient in physics."

does not belong in the lede, as per several valid reasons given above. The lede needs to factual and neutral and avoid subjective opinions, which can be mentioned latter in the body. RogerYg (talk) 12:09, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Further, as per WP:BLP such Contentious material about living persons that is Subjective & probably poorly sourced must be removed, especially if potentially libellous, and especially be removed from the lede. RogerYg (talk) 12:18, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Lede needs to mention the more factual information from sources such as : "the Indian-born, Western-educated endocrinologist who veered from conventional medicine in search of answers from the ancient Indian folk wisdom of ayurveda (from the Sanskrit words for knowledge and life), a holistic approach to well-being that stresses yoga, meditation, nutrition, herbs"

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1997-sep-07-tm-29576-story.html

RogerYg (talk) 12:34, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

We have no use for babble like "ancient Indian folk wisdom", a blatantly promotional NPOV violation. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Okay, yes, we don't need to include that.. it was the whole quote from the source. I meant the more factual and neutral information from the sources. RogerYg (talk) 13:42, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

Again, the Lede must adhere to the WP:BLP biographies of living persons policy, and Contentious material should be removed, especially if potentially libelous. Thanks RogerYg (talk) 05:24, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

It's not libel if it is true, and it is true. "Quantum medicine" is really garbage. Beware WP:NLT.

Well, it was not any threat. It was the standard message about WP: BLP and WP:BLP noticeboard that appears whenever we edit a biographical article but often overlook. So, it was just a reminder. Anyway, I removed the noticeboard part. I am all for healthy discussions without any threats. RogerYg

I moved stuff around within the lede, but there is some redundancy there. --Hob Gadling (talk) 06:10, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm fine with your move in the later paragraphs of the Lede. It's more important to keep the Lede first paragraph factual and neutral information per WP:BLP and WP: First paragraph. Thanks. RogerYg (talk) 18:48, 7 June 2024 (UTC).

His quantum bullshit is factually bullshit. My edit only accidentally fits your preconceptions that it is not. --Hob Gadling (talk) 05:07, 8 June 2024 (UTC)

I am no Chopra defender. While I agree that many people consider his ideas as techno babble, some scientists have co-authored these "abstract ideas" such as "Quantum Body", which is co-authored by Dr. Jack Tuszynski, PhD (a quantum physicist and professor of oncology in the Department of Physics at University of Alberta).

https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/719494/quantum-body-by-deepak-chopra-md-jack-tuszynski-phd-and-brian-fertig-md/

I think all "mind-science" or meta-physical ideas and claims are open to healthy criticism. I was just reminding to keep the lede voice factual & neutral per WP:BLP, WP:RS, & WP:NPOV. Thanks again for your kind inputs. RogerYg (talk) 10:10, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Does he have an MD?

He was trained under the British system, which doesn't hand out MDs to every medical doctor, but only those who do advanced research in medicine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doctor_of_Medicine

He may have accumulated one along the way, and his practicing in the USA means his use of the term simplifies the confusion in American minds, but the latter doesn't prove he has the right to it. Ender's Shadow Snr (talk) 11:42, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Teaching positions

It is not clear to me that he retains all of the teaching positions mentioned in the article. Specifically,

• adjunct professor in the marketing division at Columbia Business School
• adjunct professor of executive programs at the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University
• participates annually as a lecturer at the Update in Internal Medicine event sponsored by Harvard Medical School and the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.
• voluntary full clinical professor at the University of California, San Diego in their Department of Family Medicine and Public Health.

2603:7000:2101:AA00:44F9:2D4:FCC9:BE1D (talk) 02:49, 24 February 2025 (UTC)