3

In English you rarely hear the word 'health' without the accompaniment 'fitness'. This is for a good reason - the two topics are usually closely linked. I suspect there will be many questions that fit into both categories... just off the top of my head, which category does "I get headaches when I go jogging after about 10 minutes; what can I do to rectify this" fit in to?

I propose that these proposals be merged into a Nutrition, Health & Fitness site.

3

There are many facets and expert fields attributed to the term "health."

"Fitness and Nutrition" already covers are large range of physical fitness issues including exercise, nutrition, training, and physical wellness. Health-related questions are welcomed on that site as long as they fall within that "Physical Fitness" scope. But the site is not designed to provide specific medical advice.

To apply the the broader term "health" would suggest a site that also covers social and mental healthcare providers and general healthcare issues, including disease and treatment. That's not the focus or expertise of that site.

I would not want to expand that site to cover questions about disease, pharmaceuticals, aging, mental illness, or any other deeply-professional and complicated medical issues. Fitness & Nutrition has enough on their hands trying to attract experts to ask intriguing questions and provide competent answers.

With all due respect to the Health proposal, the example questions do not convey any coherent sense of what they are trying to be. The questions don't show any sign of contribution by experts in the healthcare profession; It's not a site for doctors or researchers or other healthcare providers. The proposal is filled with conspicuously layman-asked questions. That does not bode well for merging it anywhere.

Frankly, most of the suitable questions already belong on the Fitness & Nutrition site anyway. Those folks should just bring their questions to the Fitness & Nutrition site. But the Health proposal, as it stands now, is likely driving any chance it has of attracting an expert, professional medical community. It is in desperate need of a do-over.

  • @Robert But wouldn't merging health into Fitness & Nutrition actually help the latter get more experts in? If the resources are pooled it would maybe be a bit easier (and I'm sure there would be a bunch of people would would know about both topics). Your argument that 'Health' isn't getting enough attention from experts would seem to be an argument in favour of merging these two, to me. – Jez Jun 23 '11 at 16:32
  • 2
    @Jez: I don't think so. There doesn't seem to be many (any?) medical professionals working on the Health proposal so merging that ailing proposal into Fitness does not add anything. Fitness is having enough trouble finding competent experts so expanding its scope to include the medical field will not magically add more medical professionals to that site, either. – Robert Cartaino Jun 23 '11 at 16:42
  • 1
    Its already getting problematic that we get users who think the site gives general health advice, because of the wellness part of our FAQ. So I wouldn't support moving even further in that direction, it just dilutes the point of the site. – Ivo Flipse Jun 27 '11 at 9:42
  • I'm a newbie here so I'm still trying to get some fundamental use questions answered. I agree with Robert that these fields shouldn't be merged. However, I'm also curious about the development stages of the Fitness and Nutrition site. Was it always 100% organized, informative and professional? At 25% development, I pretty much expect the health site to look unpolished and disorganized. Does this necessarily require a "do-over"? I only expect a do-over to go through the same chaotic steps. – Matt Collins Mar 11 '12 at 1:35

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .