user64500: I have a question about my Biology Stack Exchange post: How likely is a rabies virus from dog saliva will enter a human body through this kind of finger skin?
This question is closed with following reason:

Personal medical questions and health advice are off-topic on
Biology. We cannot safely answer questions for your specific situation
and you should always consult a doctor for medical advice.

Now I don't understand where am I asking for a health advice here?
And how would a doctor be able to tell whether a virus can enter through such a peeled skin? I mean some doctors who have studied higher will definitely answer, but not every random doctor would do this.
At least in India, most doctors don't know about this at all. So definitely I can't go to them to explain the biology behind this. Nor would they explain me. They will more likely offer a medical advice / help. Honestly, that's why I asked this question here.
Even if a doctor would answer my question with scientific facts, it shouldn't be considered a medical advice or health advice. It's more about knowing the process rather than effects or prevention.
All doctor would do will try to prevent or protect you from rabies. That's what my question is not about at all.
I just want to know how likely the virus will enter though indirect touch of a licked object through this kind of finger.
So why my question is closed for these reasons? And if I'm missing something, how can I correct it?

user16866: I was not involved in the closing of this question. I think it's a well-written and supported question (thanks for that). However, I certainly could see how someone would consider closing this question. Your emphasis in this meta post suggests you're more interested in the basic biology vs receiving medical advice. However, the original post reads as if situationally such scientific/biology info would be used by you when considering how to deal with an actual medical situation regarding your finger.
Two recommendations:

Edit the post to eliminate more of the personal details. For example, eliminate the specifics about a specific wound, and instead broaden the context.

e.g., maybe you reframe the entire post to be about what depth a skin lesion must be to pose a risk for rabies transfer

A post with this angle would be further strengthened by more explicit mention of what you do/don't know about how rabies is spread.




Vote to reopen (which you've already done, but I think this meta post and a clear attempt by you to further modify the post will strengthen this vote).


Good luck, and thanks for your participation here!

user27148: I used my moderator close vote to close this question. Some reasoning:
Your question describes such a very specific circumstance that it seems unlikely to be specifically researched (that is, you will not find a study on rabies transmission in humans who have removed the upper layer of their fingers), plus you've already seen there is another Q&A here that pretty clearly addresses the more general case, which is a perfectly reasonable biology question by itself but is already answered ("what are the risks of rabies transmission through non-bite exposures").
This makes it sound like medical advice to me, rather than interest in biology: even as you insist that you are not asking for medical advice in this meta post, it sounds like you're planning to make health decisions based on the answers you get.
When you write in your meta post (emphasis mine):

So definitely I can't go to them to explain the biology behind this. Nor would they explain me. They will more likely offer a medical advice / help.

It sounds to me like you don't want to ask a physician your question because you fear they will give you advice you don't want, like advice to avoid the finger peeling. I don't want people to be using this site to dodge asking their physicians about things like this. It could also be interpreted as an XY problem, where your problem is really "are there risks to peeling the skin off of fingers" but you are asking specifically about rabies, and thinking that if the risk of rabies is low then overall risk is low; if people answer your question about rabies only, you might mistakenly think there are no other concerns to think about.
Of course, since much of this gets at assumed intentions, I could be very wrong about things, I'm just reading from what I have access to. If you modify your question as @theforestecologist suggests, your question could be reopened.

64500: 

<p>I have a question about my Biology Stack Exchange post: <a href="https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/107306/how-likely-is-a-rabies-virus-from-dog-saliva-will-enter-a-human-body-through-thi">How likely is a rabies virus from dog saliva will enter a human body through this kind of finger skin?</a></p>

<p>This question is closed with following reason:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Personal medical questions and health advice are off-topic on
Biology. We cannot safely answer questions for your specific situation
and you should always consult a doctor for medical advice.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Now I don't understand where am I asking for a health advice here?</p>
<p>And how would a doctor be able to tell whether a virus can enter through such a peeled skin? I mean some doctors who have studied higher will definitely answer, but not every random doctor would do this.</p>
<p>At least in India, most doctors don't know about this at all. So definitely I can't go to them to explain the biology behind this. Nor would they explain me. They will more likely offer a medical advice / help. Honestly, that's why I asked this question here.</p>
<p>Even if a doctor would answer my question with scientific facts, it shouldn't be considered a medical advice or health advice. It's more about knowing the process rather than effects or prevention.</p>
<p>All doctor would do will try to prevent or protect you from rabies. That's what my question is not about at all.</p>
<p><strong>I just want to know how likely the virus will enter though indirect touch of a licked object through this kind of finger.</strong></p>
<p>So why my question is closed for these reasons? And if I'm missing something, how can I correct it?</p>
 16866: <p>I was not involved in the closing of this question. I think it's a well-written and supported question (thanks for that). However, I certainly could see how someone would consider closing this question. Your emphasis in <em>this</em> meta post suggests you're more interested in the basic biology vs receiving medical advice. However, the original post reads as if <em>situationally</em> such scientific/biology info would be used by you when considering how to deal with an actual medical situation regarding your finger.</p>
<p>Two recommendations:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Edit the post to eliminate more of the personal details. For example, eliminate the specifics about a specific wound, and instead broaden the context.</p>
<ul>
<li>e.g., maybe you reframe the entire post to be about <em>what</em> depth a skin lesion must be to pose a risk for rabies transfer
<ul>
<li>A post with this angle would be further strengthened by more explicit mention of what you do/don't know about how rabies is spread.</li>
</ul>
</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li><p>Vote to reopen (which you've already done, but I think this meta post and a clear attempt by you to further modify the post will strengthen this vote).</p>
</li>
</ol>
<p>Good luck, and thanks for your participation here!</p>
 27148: <p>I used my moderator close vote to close this question. Some reasoning:</p>
<p>Your question describes such a very specific circumstance that it seems unlikely to be specifically researched (that is, you will not find a study on rabies transmission in humans who have removed the upper layer of their fingers), <em>plus</em> you've already seen there is another Q&amp;A here that pretty clearly addresses the more general case, which is a perfectly reasonable biology question by itself but is already answered (&quot;what are the risks of rabies transmission through non-bite exposures&quot;).</p>
<p>This makes it sound like medical advice to me, rather than interest in biology: even as you insist that you are not asking for medical advice in this meta post, it sounds like you're planning to make health decisions based on the answers you get.</p>
<p>When you write in your meta post (emphasis mine):</p>
<blockquote>
<p>So definitely I can't go to them to explain the biology behind this. Nor would they explain me. <strong>They will more likely offer a medical advice / help.</strong></p>
</blockquote>
<p>It sounds to me like you don't want to ask a physician your question because you fear they will give you advice you don't want, like advice to avoid the finger peeling. I don't want people to be using this site to dodge asking their physicians about things like this. It could also be interpreted as an <a href="https://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/66377/what-is-the-xy-problem">XY problem</a>, where your problem is really &quot;are there risks to peeling the skin off of fingers&quot; but you are asking specifically about rabies, and thinking that if the risk of rabies is low then overall risk is low; if people answer your question about rabies only, you might mistakenly think there are no other concerns to think about.</p>
<p>Of course, since much of this gets at assumed intentions, I could be very wrong about things, I'm just reading from what I have access to. If you modify your question as @theforestecologist suggests, your question could be reopened.</p>
