This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
All my references are at work, but I've never seen the spelling "Ginkgoopsida". A total pedant could claim that because the root word is not Greek or Latin, the vowel shouldn't elide, but common practice among botanists has been to elide, especially when the alternative results in a double vowel. Yes, it is Ginkgoaceae, not Ginkgaceae, but note Magnoliopsida, not Magnoliaopsida.-- Curtis Clark 14:42, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
There is really no need to remove the subheads in the plant description, as MPF did. The arrangement is standard among botanists, and it makes the information more easily accessible in the table of contents. It seems especially strange to leave reproduction with a subhead, while removing the rest.-- Curtis Clark 14:32, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
There seems to be an inconsitency in the article. The introduction says that the tree does not produce fruit, yet two pictures in the article refer to "fruit". Are they really seeds that just look like fruit? Deli nk 14:42, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I removed "An overdose of the pulp could cause poisoning because the pulp produces hydrogen cyanide as a side product" from Cultivation and Uses; in its context, it appears to refer to the sarcotesta, which is unpalatable and not ordinarily eaten. I'm not sure whether that or the gametophyte was the intended meaning of "pulp".-- Curtis Clark 04:46, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
I've been reading a lot about Ginkgo trees having a high tolerance to radiation poisoning, in addition to its' other high tolerances. Is this true, and if it is true- how can that be true?
Wouldn't any living thing have the same problem with nuclear radiation? But I've read something about old ginkgo trees living near the Hiroshima ground zero, healthy and unmutated.
Under the "side effects" section, it used to read:
"If any side effects are experienced consumption should be halted immediately. Ginkgo supplements are usually taken in the range of 40–200 mg per day. If the side effects continue usage should be stopped completely."
The first and third sentences are pretty redundant, so I'm deleting one.
Since when exactly is ginkgophyta an existing division? As far as I know (and I´m damn shure about it) Ginkgo is part of the division Spermatophyta, subdivision Coniferophytina, class Ginkgoopsida. The article states different, and I´d like to know why it does (perhaps I can learn a fair bit).—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.136.149.95 ( talk • contribs)
someone put loserpants at the end of the leaves section i cant find it please fix it thnx —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.222.36.88 ( talk) 22:27, 22 January 2007 (UTC).
...in the Medical section is really over the top. There NEEDS to be a refrence to all these medical claims. It reads like some 19th. century snakeoil panacea.-- Deglr6328 05:00, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
Exp Neurol. 2003 Nov;184(1):510-20. Prevention of age-related spatial memory deficits in a transgenic mouse model of Alzheimer's disease by chronic Ginkgo biloba treatment., Stackman et al. The study showed differences in spatial memory retention in Tg2576 mice given ginkgo extracts in water for six months versus those given plain water.
The International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology (2001), 4: 131-134 Cambridge University Press. Neuropsychological changes after 30-day Ginkgo biloba administration in healthy participants, Con Stough, Jodi Clarke, Jenny Lloyd, and Pradeep J. Nathan, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia. Placebo controlled double-blind study showed "significant improvements" in subjects given Ginkgo biloba extract. Carlaclaws 22:20, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I give up. Since only a handful of Wikipedia editors seem to know what "habit" means in this context, and all the rest routinely change it to "habitat", which makes no sense in the context, I've changed it to "morphology". I wonder what people will change that to?-- Curtis Clark 03:45, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Given that Gingko (EunHang) is a very popular commercial product in Japan, China and Korea, it seems reasonable to as that citation be provided as to its being thought extinct and subsequently discovered in a couple of limited valleys. Gingko is very widespread in Korea and to a lesser degree in Japan - when was it rediscovered? Introduced to other countries? Cultivated? I have not deleted the pertinent sentences, but they are particularly suspect.
Additionally, in Romanization schemes, Korean and Japanese put 'ng' before 'k' so Gingko is the preferred romanization in these countries - see a Japanese Yen banknote; as 'Gingko' also means 'bank' it is printed on the currency in romanized form. This leads me to question the 'misspelling' etymology of the word as well, given that EunHang is Korean for both the plant/tree and 'bank' and the Japanese spell bank 'Gingko' then it is unlikely to be a western misspelling.
Finally, Gingko is a common food in Asia, eaten in the autumn, it's nut soft and fruitlike. It is eaten cooked to remove the bitter toxins (much like cashew and other nuts) but hardly poisonous if eaten raw (it's bitterness limits such consumption, so poisonings are rarely, if ever reported..
All I really wanted to know is when it first appears in the fossil record...
Ginkgo is a tree, a food, and an herbal medicine. But exactly how are these related? The herbal form is a "leaf extract" -- extracted how? When did this start? Is this a traditional Eastern practice -- for how long? How did they do the extraction? Does eating the seed as a food have some of the same potential benefits, or are the chemicals in the leaves absent from the seed? Is the food only a potential danger to children, as implied by the article now, or is it just a matter that adults would have to eat proportionally more to have a bad effect? - 69.87.199.55 ( talk) 00:21, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
"The tinctures and capsules of ginkgo biloba that you buy in stores contain extracts of leaves of the tree that is widely planted in cities and parks in North America. But I'm sorry to tell you that leaves you collect from these trees won't do you any good. In fact, they're more likely to irritate your stomach than to provide any of the positive effects you might expect. The extraction process used to make the popular herbal remedy removes the irritants and concentrates the beneficial components. However, if you have a female ginkgo tree, you can eat the nuts it produces. Ginkgo nuts are often used in Asian cooking. They have no medicinal properties, but are tasty when cooked. To get to the nut, you have to go through a pulpy layer of a persimmon-like fruit that is rather smelly (which is why female ginkgo trees and their nuts are not popular here). The nuts themselves resemble chickpeas and taste like chestnuts. To prepare them for eating, you first must peel or blanch them and then boil or roast them. In Asian cuisines they are added to soups, stir fry's, and desserts. If your tree is not female (not producing fruit), you can buy dried or canned ginkgo nuts in most Asian groceries. One ounce provides 97 calories, one gram of fat, no cholesterol, four milligrams of sodium and no fiber." [1]
These factoids would seem to belong in the article in some form:
- 69.87.199.55 ( talk) 01:10, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
I was told that no wild animal eats the leaves of the ginkgo plant. If this is true I think that is very interesting. If not, listing the animals that do eat it would be good. Thanks a lot.
OK, is it time to split into 2 articles - one focussing on genus + extinct species + fossil record + evolution, the other on the species. If so what do we call them?
What do we reckon folks? Cheers, Casliber ( talk · contribs) 09:59, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
OK, now moved. I have to disappear for a few hours. Anyone want to start on the (not insignificant) job of the redirects? Most, but not all, will go to G. biloba....I can do later if everyone else is busy Cheers, Casliber ( talk · contribs) 23:08, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Nominated March 14th, 2008; Support:
Comments:
The entire Prehistory section is duplicated word for word in the article on the plant's genus, Ginkgo. Do we really need to have two identical copies saying the exact same thing in different places? 75.210.111.166 ( talk) 15:01, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Add this photo to the culinary section. Badagnani ( talk) 01:44, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Sounds good. There's no hurry, but scanning of slides is something that most universities or photo shops should be able to do fairly easily (though probably not for free, unless you know someone). Badagnani ( talk) 04:41, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
I edited out use of the words "fruit" and "nut" since this only confuses the issue. Since Ginkgo is a gymnosperm it has no fruit. Nuts are a particular kind of fruit and thus inappropriate. The fleshy "thing" in this case is a modified cone with one ovule, and the hard "thing" in the center is the seed.
I would like to add to the text that the female ginkgo fruit smells like feces, which it most definitely does, but my edit was taken out. How can anyone say that this odor is the smell of "rancid butter" but not feces? Ridiculous! Everyone knows it smells like feces. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.80.148.218 ( talk) 22:44, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
In the opening sentence of the article it states "The Ginkgo (Ginkgo biloba; in Chinese '銀杏', pinyin romanization, yín xìng), frequently misspelled as "Gingko"," Could someone clarify the fact "Ginkgo" is apparently a wrong spelling of "ginkgo" - total contradiction Stuart McN ( talk) 22:51, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
The discussion about the spelling is bewildering. Sorry for bringing it up again. How did the spelling "ginkgo" ever originate? It is strange, IMHO. Could it be a typo from the beginning? There is no language that I'm aware of in Japan, Korea or China, that has the phonological sequence /gink/ in any word or syllable. Ging-ko is a compound word made of two monosyllabic words. See the Chinese spelling provided above. The first part would be GIN or GING in various Chinese dialects, ending in a dental or velar nasal and meaning 'silver'. Further, the sequence /kg/ would be extremely unusual in any language. So really no place for "gink". As for the other part, both /ko/ and /go/ are permitted phonological sequences. Someone knowledgeable in historical Sinotibetan linguistics can likely solve this. In conclusion, either of "gingko, ginko, gingo, ginggo" are phonological possibilities, one or two of which are probably correct in this context, while the recommended form with the swapped -kg- seems quite surprising. Okjhum ( talk) 07:43, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
In the description it reads "One of the oldest Ginkgo trees is in Shanghai, within the Yuyuan Garden; it is four centuries old." But four centuries is only 400 years, while the text (in the description section and elsewhere) clearly says there are trees > 1000 years old or older. So I think the reference to the 400-year old tree should be removed. Your thoughts? Jalwikip ( talk) 08:18, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Qoute, "Because of its status in Buddhism and Confucianism, the Ginkgo is also widely planted in Korea and parts of Japan". But this article does not have any information about that status, or other cultural significance. Needs adding. Tobermory ( talk) 23:37, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
How about Glossopteris as a remote ancestor ?
Rosetta ( talk) 23:16, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
The following original research speculation now appears in the article:
The presence of amentoflavone in Gingko biloba leaves would indicate a potential for interactions with many medications through the strong inhibition of CYP3A4 and CYP2C9; however, there is a lack of any empirical evidence supporting this. It is possible that the concentration of amentoflavone found even in commercial Gingko biloba extracts is too low to be pharmacologically active. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ocdncntx ( talk • contribs) 16:57, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello. I've been reading up on Ginkgo, and I plan to begin taking it as a supplement. Does it interact with medications such as SSRI's or other antidepressants, for instance, wellbutrin or the atypical antipsychotic seroquel?-- Neur0tikX . talk 21:47, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
I haven't found any information on Seroquel (quetiapine) interactions with gingko.
There are a few known interactions with antidepressants. The page currently states that "should also not be used by people who are taking certain types of antidepressants (MAOIs and SSRIs[26][27])", which are based upon animal testing.
In contrast, there have been numerous studies examining the use of ginkgo biloba to offset the side-effects of SSRIs, in particular as related to sexual dysfunction. The studies vary in results, but more importantly I have been unable to find any references to adverse side-effects combining SSRIs and ginkgo in any of these studies. As a result, I think stating that SSRIs should not be used with ginkgo is exaggerated and incorrect.
There is also a single documented case of an 80 year old patient on both Ginkgo and trazedone (a benzodiazepine) going into a benzodiazepine overdose coma. The involvement of Ginkgo is theorized, as the patient was never on ginkgo with any other benzodiazepine or on trazedone without ginkgo. She has been nonresponsive to another breed of benzodiazepine, while ginkgo and trazedone caused a marked improvement prior to her overdose. The number of search results linking Ginkgo to comas is abnormally high for a single case in which Ginkgo was suspected of involvement without any actual evidence. See the full article on this incident. This may merit mention that Ginkgo should not be combined with benzodiazepines. -- Anonymous - 12:25, 1 May 2008
Trazedone isn't a benzodiazepine. -- Anonymous - 12 July 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.77.219.185 ( talk) 19:35, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
Really good book
The fossilized ginkgo leaf shown in 'the MacAbee' BC confuses me. I am from that province and am not aware of any such place name. Nor was I able to find one through google maps. Is it perhaps misspelled? Perhaps I've missed something? If someone could confirm that or correct it as the case may be, that would be grand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.52.180.6 ( talk) 18:17, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
There's so much about medical usage already, and possibly more to come. Won't you also feel it's time to outsource that topic ? From the view of an average botanically / culturally interested visitor, all the phytochemical stuff just clutters the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.49.37.51 ( talk) 23:31, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
I'm a little confused. How can something widely cultivated for profit be deemed "endangered"? - knoodelhed 17:05, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Here is a primary source. "We conclude that Ginkgo biloba extract caused cancers of the thyroid gland in male and female rats and male mice and cancers of the liver in male and female mice." NTP TR 578, March 2013, page 6, http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/htdocs/LT_rpts/TR578_508.pdf (pdf) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.115.155.103 ( talk) 06:07, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
At the end of the paleontology section (which should probably be renamed paleobotany; what do i know?) there are a few images of reconstructions of four gingko species including G. biloba itself, namely G. apodes, G yimaensis, and G. adiantoides. They all have the same citation:
I propose moving this to the Gingko genus article page. 198.151.130.136 ( talk) 17:40, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Current dictionaries like Merriam-Webster still define Gingko as an alternative spelling not an incorrect spelling. No reason that edit should have been reverted. I understand that Ginkgos is the same as Ginkgoes and I am fine with that reversion. Do not revert without giving a reason though. -- User:Asphaltbuffet 18:44, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
Gingko is an old variant spelling; I don't agree that it is a mis-spelling. Here are some instances of "Gingko", available free online from Google Books:
-- Una Smith ( talk) 06:26, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Hello! I notice a controversy between the phrase "his y was misread as a g, and the misspelling stuck" and the source you are refering to with footnote (15). Check that text, especially paragraphe " In a manuscript volume nowadays called Collectanea Japonica (British Library, Sloane Collection, 3062) we find several pages with the numbers referring to the Chinese characters in the Kinmôzui. Here the readings of the Chinese characters are given in Latin letters. The pronounciation of the 34th character is explained as "Ginnan" and wrongly as "Ginkgo" instead of the more appropiate spelling as "Ginkjo" or "Ginkio" (fig.2). This note shows that the incorrect spelling in Kaempfer's Flora Japanica (5th book of the Amoenitates Exoticae) is not a result of a simple misprint or misunderstanding by the typesetter in Lemgo. It was Kaempfer himself who made a small mistake with long-lasting consequences." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.173.62.129 ( talk) 11:07, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
There is no good evidence supporting the use of Ginkgo for treating high blood pressure,[45] tinnitus,[46] post-stroke recovery,[47] peripheral arterial disease,[48] macular degeneration,[49] or altitude sickness.[50]
Ginkgo may have undesirable effects, especially for individuals with blood circulation disorders and those taking anticoagulants such as aspirin or warfarin
Additional side effects include increased risk of bleeding, gastrointestinal discomfort, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, headaches, dizziness, heart palpitations, and restlessness.
Ginkgo should be used with caution when combined with other herbs known to increase bleeding (e.g. garlic, ginseng, ginger).
According to a systemic review, the effects of ginkgo on pregnant women may include increased bleeding time, and should be avoided during lactation due to inadequate safety evidence.
I also add this link: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16801106
GBE clearly inhibits platelet aggregation. So claims that it has zero medical use are plain bullshit. Pulsatile tinnitus is caused by altered blood flood for one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.240.175.253 ( talk) 18:58, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
Recent edits have been additing and editing content in a way not compliant with WP:MEDRS and have been re-instated without discussion.[ Biomedical content should comply with our guidance and sources summarized accurately to maintain neutrality. The page markup has also been broken. Alexbrn talk| contribs| COI 15:20, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Additionally, there was a section referring to the study saying Ginkgo Biloba caused cancer in rats and mice. It would be worth having back in the article, although it should be pointed out that the (1) doses were extremely high and (2) the extract used was extremely unusual and did not meet various requirements/conventions (ginkgolic acids, biflavones, ~250% the usual dose of Terpene Lactones) such as those satisfied by the standardised EGB 761 extract that is manufactured in Germany, extracts which have been found be safe and to produce no ill effect at high doses, and indeed has been included in hundreds of studies. There is a 2013 article (that I had previously linked to) that says all of this in detail. Raiden10 ( talk) 18:53, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Considering that there actually are reports that Ginkgo biloba has positive cognitive effects: [1] , let's remind ourselves that the world is full of hobbyist "skeptics" who self-appoint themselves as majors in various disinformation campaigns on behalf of what they perceive as "real science". This article is far worse than "cherry picked", and obviously the neutrality of the article needs to be disputed. Gabriel Arthur Petrie ( talk) 20:33, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Ginkgo biloba. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 21:16, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Ok I don't know what the issue is, but these are either links to actual papers or press releases written by the paper authors which were published simultaneously with the papers because the actual papers are either paywalled or not accessible:
Wang, Chen, and Wang (July 23, 2013). "A ginkgo biloba extract promotes proliferation of endogenous neural stem cells". eurekalert.org. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2013-07/nrr-agb072313.php
Doré, Saleem, Zhuang, and Biswal (October 9, 2008). "Mouse studies suggest daily dose of ginkgo may prevent brain cell damage after a stroke". .eurekalert.org. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-10/jhmi-mss100708.php
Ercoli, Small et al. (November 11, 2003). "UCLA Researchers Find Gingko Biloba May Help Improve Memory". sciencedaily.com. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/11/031111070042.htm
Papadopoulos, Pretner, Amri, Li, Brown, Lin, Makariou et al. (February 23, 2006). "Ginkgo Biloba Extract: More than Just for Memory? Animal Studies at Georgetown Find Ginkgo Biloba May Have Preventive Effects For Cancerous Human Brain and Breast Tumors". georgetown.edu. http://explore.georgetown.edu/news/?ID=13079
Lovera et al. (April 28, 2005). "OHSU Study Finds Ginkgo Beneficial For MS Symptoms". sciencedaily.com. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/04/050428093022.htm
I am aware of the meta study and its claim that no benefits were found however the article itself is paywalled and there is no way to check what actual papers where or were not examined nor what their methodology was.
I do agree to possibly renaming the section to something like: Possible medical uses and health effects F. Pacifica 23:43, 11 August 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fpacifica ( talk • contribs)
F. Pacifica 23:51, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
There are other serious problems:
1. The section has now been named "Research" instead of "Health effects". Excuse me, but there are health effects that have been shown in published papers which I cited.
2. There is a 2008 study which *did* find benefit for stroke patients yet someone removed the info and reverted back to the text "There is no good evidence supporting the use of Ginkgo for treating... post-stroke recovery..."
Excuse me but there *is* evidence supporting Ginkgo's benefit for stroke recovery. Did the person who duly removed my edits bother to read the citation - Doré, Saleem, Zhuang, and Biswal (October 9, 2008). "Mouse studies suggest daily dose of ginkgo may prevent brain cell damage after a stroke"; eurekalert.org; http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-10/jhmi-mss100708.php - before summarily deleting it? F. Pacifica 00:06, 12 August 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fpacifica ( talk • contribs)
This section needs serious revision to bring it up to snuff per MEDRS. It mentions research that is dubious, and a new study needs to be included which debunks its use. It is reported on here:
Of course the JAMA article should be used, but this secondary source justifies using the primary one:
Brangifer ( talk) 05:59, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
The 2005 study by Zeng X1, Liu M, Yang Y, Li Y, Asplund K. claimed "...no convincing evidence from trials of sufficient methodological quality to support the routine use of Ginkgo biloba extract to promote recovery after stroke." however there is a 2008 study by Doré, Saleem, Zhuang, and Biswal which found "Our results suggest that some element or elements in ginkgo actually protect brain cells during stroke." — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Fpacifica (
talk •
contribs)
22:44, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
This section is clearly and implausibly biased. That is demonstrated by consulting the external link to the University of Maryland Medical Centre [2]. UMMC is much more positive about the health benefits and is probably a better source of information than the latest author of this section. This article now needs a thorough revision for OBJECTIVITY. It shows only an overhwelmingly negative attitude towards the health benefits of this herb. Since there is just as much research to show positive benefits, the article needs to be REWRITTEN urgently. It does not indicate the current state of knowledge, but only one extreme opinion or viewpoint. That negative opinion and viewpoint needs to be stated and respected, but so does its opposite, and all the grey areas in between. Busterbarker2008 ( talk) 09:34, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
@ Busterbarker2008: Firstly, the link you gave doesn't remotely meet the standards of WP:MEDRS. Secondly, if you read it, all the "positive" information is qualified with words like "may", "small study" and "preliminary study", whereas the "negative" information is like "In 2008, a well-designed study with more than 3,000 elderly people found that ginkgo was no better than placebo in preventing dementia or Alzheimer disease." No, the section isn't clearly biased. It reflects correctly the weight of reliable medical sources. Peter coxhead ( talk) 12:57, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
@ Peter coxhead:Much of the negative commentary in this section fails to meet the standards of WP:MEDRS which specifically cautions against providing undue weight to single studies: 'Primary sources should not be cited or juxtaposed with intent to "debunk", contradict, or counter conclusions made by reliable secondary sources.' This section seems unduly weighted by cherry-picked primary sources. This section seems biased as it does not reflect the research and experience which has led enormous numbers of doctors worldwide to daily prescribe this herb, particularly, as has often been published, in Germany. This is too important and too widely-prescribed a medicine to fall prey to a single, personal viewpoint on Wikipedia, which is dedicated to providing broad, objective coverage.
References
Nowhere is it explained exactly when that was. 69.22.242.15 ( talk) 08:23, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
There's a whole folklore (Chinese and western) associated with Ginkgo biloba preparations and extracts, not including culinary uses.
We have sections for Clinical and Research uses of one standardized extract EGb 761. But there are plenty of other less refined extracts, including simple dried/powdered leaf preparations used as herbal remedies for diverse health conditions like asthma, etc in China and elsewhere. Then there's the faddish use of GBE not as any kind of remedy, but for cognitive and/or memory enhancement. This isn't about medicine, it's about folklore. Should we add a section for these? We mention the latter under Research, but there's no academic or medical research going on for these uses. Sbalfour ( talk) 23:17, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Ginkgo biloba. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 19:41, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
is it possible that "ginkgo" was meant to be written as "ginkyo", but the y was mistaken for a g (perhaps due to messy writing)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:252:D79:2010:AC87:1867:927F:3969 ( talk) 18:47, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Ginkgo biloba. 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.
An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked=
to true
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:24, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
A glance at this page from the University of Maryland Medical Center,
http://umm.edu/health/medical/altmed/herb/ginkgo-biloba
which includes numerous supporting publications, gives an entirely different picture of ginkgo biloba, one that emphasizes its value in medicine. The Wikipedia article, however, is relentlessly negative. Without taking sides, it is clear that the Wikipedia article needs to have a balanced viewpoint. That is completely lacking in the current version and that is why I will mark this article as biased until it has a NPOV. Busterbarker2008 ( talk) 14:05, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
NPOV tag restored as it will continue to be until this article has a NPOV. "Neutrality here at Wikipedia is all about presenting competing versions of what the facts are. It doesn't matter at all how convinced we are that our facts are the facts. If a significant number of other interested parties really do disagree with us, no matter how wrong we think they are, the neutrality policy dictates that the discussion be recast as a fair presentation of the dispute between the parties." Busterbarker2008 ( talk) 12:18, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
When to use: Place this template on an article when you have identified a serious issue of balance and the lack of a WP:Neutral point of view, and you wish to attract editors with different viewpoints to the article. Please also explain on the article's talk page why you are adding this tag, identifying specific issues that are actionable within Wikipedia's content policies.- and:
This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. You may remove this template whenever any one of the following is true: There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved; it is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given; in the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
The MayoClinic entries on dietary supplements are not written by Mayo healthcare professionals. Note at end identifies the contract company. And as pointed out by Peter Coxhead and others, even the few indications given a "B" ranking all end with recommendation that more research is needed. David notMD ( talk) 10:29, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Ginkgo biloba. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:00, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
-Ginkgo is widely used in Europe for treating dementia. At first, doctors thought it helped because it improves blood flow to the brain. Now research suggests it may protect nerve cells that are damaged in Alzheimer disease. Several studies show that ginkgo has a positive effect on memory and thinking in people with Alzheimer disease or vascular dementia.
Studies suggest that ginkgo may help people with Alzheimer disease:
Improve thinking, learning, and memory (cognitive function) Have an easier time performing daily activities Improve social behavior Have fewer feelings of depression Several studies have found that ginkgo may work as well as some prescription Alzheimer disease medications to delay the symptoms of dementia. It has not been tested against all of the drugs prescribed to treat Alzheimer disease. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.116.244.88 ( talk) 01:34, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
All my references are at work, but I've never seen the spelling "Ginkgoopsida". A total pedant could claim that because the root word is not Greek or Latin, the vowel shouldn't elide, but common practice among botanists has been to elide, especially when the alternative results in a double vowel. Yes, it is Ginkgoaceae, not Ginkgaceae, but note Magnoliopsida, not Magnoliaopsida.-- Curtis Clark 14:42, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
There is really no need to remove the subheads in the plant description, as MPF did. The arrangement is standard among botanists, and it makes the information more easily accessible in the table of contents. It seems especially strange to leave reproduction with a subhead, while removing the rest.-- Curtis Clark 14:32, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
There seems to be an inconsitency in the article. The introduction says that the tree does not produce fruit, yet two pictures in the article refer to "fruit". Are they really seeds that just look like fruit? Deli nk 14:42, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I removed "An overdose of the pulp could cause poisoning because the pulp produces hydrogen cyanide as a side product" from Cultivation and Uses; in its context, it appears to refer to the sarcotesta, which is unpalatable and not ordinarily eaten. I'm not sure whether that or the gametophyte was the intended meaning of "pulp".-- Curtis Clark 04:46, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
I've been reading a lot about Ginkgo trees having a high tolerance to radiation poisoning, in addition to its' other high tolerances. Is this true, and if it is true- how can that be true?
Wouldn't any living thing have the same problem with nuclear radiation? But I've read something about old ginkgo trees living near the Hiroshima ground zero, healthy and unmutated.
Under the "side effects" section, it used to read:
"If any side effects are experienced consumption should be halted immediately. Ginkgo supplements are usually taken in the range of 40–200 mg per day. If the side effects continue usage should be stopped completely."
The first and third sentences are pretty redundant, so I'm deleting one.
Since when exactly is ginkgophyta an existing division? As far as I know (and I´m damn shure about it) Ginkgo is part of the division Spermatophyta, subdivision Coniferophytina, class Ginkgoopsida. The article states different, and I´d like to know why it does (perhaps I can learn a fair bit).—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.136.149.95 ( talk • contribs)
someone put loserpants at the end of the leaves section i cant find it please fix it thnx —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.222.36.88 ( talk) 22:27, 22 January 2007 (UTC).
...in the Medical section is really over the top. There NEEDS to be a refrence to all these medical claims. It reads like some 19th. century snakeoil panacea.-- Deglr6328 05:00, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
Exp Neurol. 2003 Nov;184(1):510-20. Prevention of age-related spatial memory deficits in a transgenic mouse model of Alzheimer's disease by chronic Ginkgo biloba treatment., Stackman et al. The study showed differences in spatial memory retention in Tg2576 mice given ginkgo extracts in water for six months versus those given plain water.
The International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology (2001), 4: 131-134 Cambridge University Press. Neuropsychological changes after 30-day Ginkgo biloba administration in healthy participants, Con Stough, Jodi Clarke, Jenny Lloyd, and Pradeep J. Nathan, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia. Placebo controlled double-blind study showed "significant improvements" in subjects given Ginkgo biloba extract. Carlaclaws 22:20, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I give up. Since only a handful of Wikipedia editors seem to know what "habit" means in this context, and all the rest routinely change it to "habitat", which makes no sense in the context, I've changed it to "morphology". I wonder what people will change that to?-- Curtis Clark 03:45, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Given that Gingko (EunHang) is a very popular commercial product in Japan, China and Korea, it seems reasonable to as that citation be provided as to its being thought extinct and subsequently discovered in a couple of limited valleys. Gingko is very widespread in Korea and to a lesser degree in Japan - when was it rediscovered? Introduced to other countries? Cultivated? I have not deleted the pertinent sentences, but they are particularly suspect.
Additionally, in Romanization schemes, Korean and Japanese put 'ng' before 'k' so Gingko is the preferred romanization in these countries - see a Japanese Yen banknote; as 'Gingko' also means 'bank' it is printed on the currency in romanized form. This leads me to question the 'misspelling' etymology of the word as well, given that EunHang is Korean for both the plant/tree and 'bank' and the Japanese spell bank 'Gingko' then it is unlikely to be a western misspelling.
Finally, Gingko is a common food in Asia, eaten in the autumn, it's nut soft and fruitlike. It is eaten cooked to remove the bitter toxins (much like cashew and other nuts) but hardly poisonous if eaten raw (it's bitterness limits such consumption, so poisonings are rarely, if ever reported..
All I really wanted to know is when it first appears in the fossil record...
Ginkgo is a tree, a food, and an herbal medicine. But exactly how are these related? The herbal form is a "leaf extract" -- extracted how? When did this start? Is this a traditional Eastern practice -- for how long? How did they do the extraction? Does eating the seed as a food have some of the same potential benefits, or are the chemicals in the leaves absent from the seed? Is the food only a potential danger to children, as implied by the article now, or is it just a matter that adults would have to eat proportionally more to have a bad effect? - 69.87.199.55 ( talk) 00:21, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
"The tinctures and capsules of ginkgo biloba that you buy in stores contain extracts of leaves of the tree that is widely planted in cities and parks in North America. But I'm sorry to tell you that leaves you collect from these trees won't do you any good. In fact, they're more likely to irritate your stomach than to provide any of the positive effects you might expect. The extraction process used to make the popular herbal remedy removes the irritants and concentrates the beneficial components. However, if you have a female ginkgo tree, you can eat the nuts it produces. Ginkgo nuts are often used in Asian cooking. They have no medicinal properties, but are tasty when cooked. To get to the nut, you have to go through a pulpy layer of a persimmon-like fruit that is rather smelly (which is why female ginkgo trees and their nuts are not popular here). The nuts themselves resemble chickpeas and taste like chestnuts. To prepare them for eating, you first must peel or blanch them and then boil or roast them. In Asian cuisines they are added to soups, stir fry's, and desserts. If your tree is not female (not producing fruit), you can buy dried or canned ginkgo nuts in most Asian groceries. One ounce provides 97 calories, one gram of fat, no cholesterol, four milligrams of sodium and no fiber." [1]
These factoids would seem to belong in the article in some form:
- 69.87.199.55 ( talk) 01:10, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
I was told that no wild animal eats the leaves of the ginkgo plant. If this is true I think that is very interesting. If not, listing the animals that do eat it would be good. Thanks a lot.
OK, is it time to split into 2 articles - one focussing on genus + extinct species + fossil record + evolution, the other on the species. If so what do we call them?
What do we reckon folks? Cheers, Casliber ( talk · contribs) 09:59, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
OK, now moved. I have to disappear for a few hours. Anyone want to start on the (not insignificant) job of the redirects? Most, but not all, will go to G. biloba....I can do later if everyone else is busy Cheers, Casliber ( talk · contribs) 23:08, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Nominated March 14th, 2008; Support:
Comments:
The entire Prehistory section is duplicated word for word in the article on the plant's genus, Ginkgo. Do we really need to have two identical copies saying the exact same thing in different places? 75.210.111.166 ( talk) 15:01, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
Add this photo to the culinary section. Badagnani ( talk) 01:44, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Sounds good. There's no hurry, but scanning of slides is something that most universities or photo shops should be able to do fairly easily (though probably not for free, unless you know someone). Badagnani ( talk) 04:41, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
I edited out use of the words "fruit" and "nut" since this only confuses the issue. Since Ginkgo is a gymnosperm it has no fruit. Nuts are a particular kind of fruit and thus inappropriate. The fleshy "thing" in this case is a modified cone with one ovule, and the hard "thing" in the center is the seed.
I would like to add to the text that the female ginkgo fruit smells like feces, which it most definitely does, but my edit was taken out. How can anyone say that this odor is the smell of "rancid butter" but not feces? Ridiculous! Everyone knows it smells like feces. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.80.148.218 ( talk) 22:44, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
In the opening sentence of the article it states "The Ginkgo (Ginkgo biloba; in Chinese '銀杏', pinyin romanization, yín xìng), frequently misspelled as "Gingko"," Could someone clarify the fact "Ginkgo" is apparently a wrong spelling of "ginkgo" - total contradiction Stuart McN ( talk) 22:51, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
The discussion about the spelling is bewildering. Sorry for bringing it up again. How did the spelling "ginkgo" ever originate? It is strange, IMHO. Could it be a typo from the beginning? There is no language that I'm aware of in Japan, Korea or China, that has the phonological sequence /gink/ in any word or syllable. Ging-ko is a compound word made of two monosyllabic words. See the Chinese spelling provided above. The first part would be GIN or GING in various Chinese dialects, ending in a dental or velar nasal and meaning 'silver'. Further, the sequence /kg/ would be extremely unusual in any language. So really no place for "gink". As for the other part, both /ko/ and /go/ are permitted phonological sequences. Someone knowledgeable in historical Sinotibetan linguistics can likely solve this. In conclusion, either of "gingko, ginko, gingo, ginggo" are phonological possibilities, one or two of which are probably correct in this context, while the recommended form with the swapped -kg- seems quite surprising. Okjhum ( talk) 07:43, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
In the description it reads "One of the oldest Ginkgo trees is in Shanghai, within the Yuyuan Garden; it is four centuries old." But four centuries is only 400 years, while the text (in the description section and elsewhere) clearly says there are trees > 1000 years old or older. So I think the reference to the 400-year old tree should be removed. Your thoughts? Jalwikip ( talk) 08:18, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
Qoute, "Because of its status in Buddhism and Confucianism, the Ginkgo is also widely planted in Korea and parts of Japan". But this article does not have any information about that status, or other cultural significance. Needs adding. Tobermory ( talk) 23:37, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
How about Glossopteris as a remote ancestor ?
Rosetta ( talk) 23:16, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
The following original research speculation now appears in the article:
The presence of amentoflavone in Gingko biloba leaves would indicate a potential for interactions with many medications through the strong inhibition of CYP3A4 and CYP2C9; however, there is a lack of any empirical evidence supporting this. It is possible that the concentration of amentoflavone found even in commercial Gingko biloba extracts is too low to be pharmacologically active. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ocdncntx ( talk • contribs) 16:57, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello. I've been reading up on Ginkgo, and I plan to begin taking it as a supplement. Does it interact with medications such as SSRI's or other antidepressants, for instance, wellbutrin or the atypical antipsychotic seroquel?-- Neur0tikX . talk 21:47, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
I haven't found any information on Seroquel (quetiapine) interactions with gingko.
There are a few known interactions with antidepressants. The page currently states that "should also not be used by people who are taking certain types of antidepressants (MAOIs and SSRIs[26][27])", which are based upon animal testing.
In contrast, there have been numerous studies examining the use of ginkgo biloba to offset the side-effects of SSRIs, in particular as related to sexual dysfunction. The studies vary in results, but more importantly I have been unable to find any references to adverse side-effects combining SSRIs and ginkgo in any of these studies. As a result, I think stating that SSRIs should not be used with ginkgo is exaggerated and incorrect.
There is also a single documented case of an 80 year old patient on both Ginkgo and trazedone (a benzodiazepine) going into a benzodiazepine overdose coma. The involvement of Ginkgo is theorized, as the patient was never on ginkgo with any other benzodiazepine or on trazedone without ginkgo. She has been nonresponsive to another breed of benzodiazepine, while ginkgo and trazedone caused a marked improvement prior to her overdose. The number of search results linking Ginkgo to comas is abnormally high for a single case in which Ginkgo was suspected of involvement without any actual evidence. See the full article on this incident. This may merit mention that Ginkgo should not be combined with benzodiazepines. -- Anonymous - 12:25, 1 May 2008
Trazedone isn't a benzodiazepine. -- Anonymous - 12 July 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.77.219.185 ( talk) 19:35, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
Really good book
The fossilized ginkgo leaf shown in 'the MacAbee' BC confuses me. I am from that province and am not aware of any such place name. Nor was I able to find one through google maps. Is it perhaps misspelled? Perhaps I've missed something? If someone could confirm that or correct it as the case may be, that would be grand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.52.180.6 ( talk) 18:17, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
There's so much about medical usage already, and possibly more to come. Won't you also feel it's time to outsource that topic ? From the view of an average botanically / culturally interested visitor, all the phytochemical stuff just clutters the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.49.37.51 ( talk) 23:31, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
I'm a little confused. How can something widely cultivated for profit be deemed "endangered"? - knoodelhed 17:05, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Here is a primary source. "We conclude that Ginkgo biloba extract caused cancers of the thyroid gland in male and female rats and male mice and cancers of the liver in male and female mice." NTP TR 578, March 2013, page 6, http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/htdocs/LT_rpts/TR578_508.pdf (pdf) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.115.155.103 ( talk) 06:07, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
At the end of the paleontology section (which should probably be renamed paleobotany; what do i know?) there are a few images of reconstructions of four gingko species including G. biloba itself, namely G. apodes, G yimaensis, and G. adiantoides. They all have the same citation:
I propose moving this to the Gingko genus article page. 198.151.130.136 ( talk) 17:40, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Current dictionaries like Merriam-Webster still define Gingko as an alternative spelling not an incorrect spelling. No reason that edit should have been reverted. I understand that Ginkgos is the same as Ginkgoes and I am fine with that reversion. Do not revert without giving a reason though. -- User:Asphaltbuffet 18:44, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
Gingko is an old variant spelling; I don't agree that it is a mis-spelling. Here are some instances of "Gingko", available free online from Google Books:
-- Una Smith ( talk) 06:26, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Hello! I notice a controversy between the phrase "his y was misread as a g, and the misspelling stuck" and the source you are refering to with footnote (15). Check that text, especially paragraphe " In a manuscript volume nowadays called Collectanea Japonica (British Library, Sloane Collection, 3062) we find several pages with the numbers referring to the Chinese characters in the Kinmôzui. Here the readings of the Chinese characters are given in Latin letters. The pronounciation of the 34th character is explained as "Ginnan" and wrongly as "Ginkgo" instead of the more appropiate spelling as "Ginkjo" or "Ginkio" (fig.2). This note shows that the incorrect spelling in Kaempfer's Flora Japanica (5th book of the Amoenitates Exoticae) is not a result of a simple misprint or misunderstanding by the typesetter in Lemgo. It was Kaempfer himself who made a small mistake with long-lasting consequences." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.173.62.129 ( talk) 11:07, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
There is no good evidence supporting the use of Ginkgo for treating high blood pressure,[45] tinnitus,[46] post-stroke recovery,[47] peripheral arterial disease,[48] macular degeneration,[49] or altitude sickness.[50]
Ginkgo may have undesirable effects, especially for individuals with blood circulation disorders and those taking anticoagulants such as aspirin or warfarin
Additional side effects include increased risk of bleeding, gastrointestinal discomfort, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, headaches, dizziness, heart palpitations, and restlessness.
Ginkgo should be used with caution when combined with other herbs known to increase bleeding (e.g. garlic, ginseng, ginger).
According to a systemic review, the effects of ginkgo on pregnant women may include increased bleeding time, and should be avoided during lactation due to inadequate safety evidence.
I also add this link: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16801106
GBE clearly inhibits platelet aggregation. So claims that it has zero medical use are plain bullshit. Pulsatile tinnitus is caused by altered blood flood for one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.240.175.253 ( talk) 18:58, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
Recent edits have been additing and editing content in a way not compliant with WP:MEDRS and have been re-instated without discussion.[ Biomedical content should comply with our guidance and sources summarized accurately to maintain neutrality. The page markup has also been broken. Alexbrn talk| contribs| COI 15:20, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
Additionally, there was a section referring to the study saying Ginkgo Biloba caused cancer in rats and mice. It would be worth having back in the article, although it should be pointed out that the (1) doses were extremely high and (2) the extract used was extremely unusual and did not meet various requirements/conventions (ginkgolic acids, biflavones, ~250% the usual dose of Terpene Lactones) such as those satisfied by the standardised EGB 761 extract that is manufactured in Germany, extracts which have been found be safe and to produce no ill effect at high doses, and indeed has been included in hundreds of studies. There is a 2013 article (that I had previously linked to) that says all of this in detail. Raiden10 ( talk) 18:53, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
Considering that there actually are reports that Ginkgo biloba has positive cognitive effects: [1] , let's remind ourselves that the world is full of hobbyist "skeptics" who self-appoint themselves as majors in various disinformation campaigns on behalf of what they perceive as "real science". This article is far worse than "cherry picked", and obviously the neutrality of the article needs to be disputed. Gabriel Arthur Petrie ( talk) 20:33, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Ginkgo biloba. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 21:16, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Ok I don't know what the issue is, but these are either links to actual papers or press releases written by the paper authors which were published simultaneously with the papers because the actual papers are either paywalled or not accessible:
Wang, Chen, and Wang (July 23, 2013). "A ginkgo biloba extract promotes proliferation of endogenous neural stem cells". eurekalert.org. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2013-07/nrr-agb072313.php
Doré, Saleem, Zhuang, and Biswal (October 9, 2008). "Mouse studies suggest daily dose of ginkgo may prevent brain cell damage after a stroke". .eurekalert.org. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-10/jhmi-mss100708.php
Ercoli, Small et al. (November 11, 2003). "UCLA Researchers Find Gingko Biloba May Help Improve Memory". sciencedaily.com. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/11/031111070042.htm
Papadopoulos, Pretner, Amri, Li, Brown, Lin, Makariou et al. (February 23, 2006). "Ginkgo Biloba Extract: More than Just for Memory? Animal Studies at Georgetown Find Ginkgo Biloba May Have Preventive Effects For Cancerous Human Brain and Breast Tumors". georgetown.edu. http://explore.georgetown.edu/news/?ID=13079
Lovera et al. (April 28, 2005). "OHSU Study Finds Ginkgo Beneficial For MS Symptoms". sciencedaily.com. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/04/050428093022.htm
I am aware of the meta study and its claim that no benefits were found however the article itself is paywalled and there is no way to check what actual papers where or were not examined nor what their methodology was.
I do agree to possibly renaming the section to something like: Possible medical uses and health effects F. Pacifica 23:43, 11 August 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fpacifica ( talk • contribs)
F. Pacifica 23:51, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
There are other serious problems:
1. The section has now been named "Research" instead of "Health effects". Excuse me, but there are health effects that have been shown in published papers which I cited.
2. There is a 2008 study which *did* find benefit for stroke patients yet someone removed the info and reverted back to the text "There is no good evidence supporting the use of Ginkgo for treating... post-stroke recovery..."
Excuse me but there *is* evidence supporting Ginkgo's benefit for stroke recovery. Did the person who duly removed my edits bother to read the citation - Doré, Saleem, Zhuang, and Biswal (October 9, 2008). "Mouse studies suggest daily dose of ginkgo may prevent brain cell damage after a stroke"; eurekalert.org; http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-10/jhmi-mss100708.php - before summarily deleting it? F. Pacifica 00:06, 12 August 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fpacifica ( talk • contribs)
This section needs serious revision to bring it up to snuff per MEDRS. It mentions research that is dubious, and a new study needs to be included which debunks its use. It is reported on here:
Of course the JAMA article should be used, but this secondary source justifies using the primary one:
Brangifer ( talk) 05:59, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
The 2005 study by Zeng X1, Liu M, Yang Y, Li Y, Asplund K. claimed "...no convincing evidence from trials of sufficient methodological quality to support the routine use of Ginkgo biloba extract to promote recovery after stroke." however there is a 2008 study by Doré, Saleem, Zhuang, and Biswal which found "Our results suggest that some element or elements in ginkgo actually protect brain cells during stroke." — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Fpacifica (
talk •
contribs)
22:44, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
This section is clearly and implausibly biased. That is demonstrated by consulting the external link to the University of Maryland Medical Centre [2]. UMMC is much more positive about the health benefits and is probably a better source of information than the latest author of this section. This article now needs a thorough revision for OBJECTIVITY. It shows only an overhwelmingly negative attitude towards the health benefits of this herb. Since there is just as much research to show positive benefits, the article needs to be REWRITTEN urgently. It does not indicate the current state of knowledge, but only one extreme opinion or viewpoint. That negative opinion and viewpoint needs to be stated and respected, but so does its opposite, and all the grey areas in between. Busterbarker2008 ( talk) 09:34, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
@ Busterbarker2008: Firstly, the link you gave doesn't remotely meet the standards of WP:MEDRS. Secondly, if you read it, all the "positive" information is qualified with words like "may", "small study" and "preliminary study", whereas the "negative" information is like "In 2008, a well-designed study with more than 3,000 elderly people found that ginkgo was no better than placebo in preventing dementia or Alzheimer disease." No, the section isn't clearly biased. It reflects correctly the weight of reliable medical sources. Peter coxhead ( talk) 12:57, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
@ Peter coxhead:Much of the negative commentary in this section fails to meet the standards of WP:MEDRS which specifically cautions against providing undue weight to single studies: 'Primary sources should not be cited or juxtaposed with intent to "debunk", contradict, or counter conclusions made by reliable secondary sources.' This section seems unduly weighted by cherry-picked primary sources. This section seems biased as it does not reflect the research and experience which has led enormous numbers of doctors worldwide to daily prescribe this herb, particularly, as has often been published, in Germany. This is too important and too widely-prescribed a medicine to fall prey to a single, personal viewpoint on Wikipedia, which is dedicated to providing broad, objective coverage.
References
Nowhere is it explained exactly when that was. 69.22.242.15 ( talk) 08:23, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
There's a whole folklore (Chinese and western) associated with Ginkgo biloba preparations and extracts, not including culinary uses.
We have sections for Clinical and Research uses of one standardized extract EGb 761. But there are plenty of other less refined extracts, including simple dried/powdered leaf preparations used as herbal remedies for diverse health conditions like asthma, etc in China and elsewhere. Then there's the faddish use of GBE not as any kind of remedy, but for cognitive and/or memory enhancement. This isn't about medicine, it's about folklore. Should we add a section for these? We mention the latter under Research, but there's no academic or medical research going on for these uses. Sbalfour ( talk) 23:17, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Ginkgo biloba. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 19:41, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
is it possible that "ginkgo" was meant to be written as "ginkyo", but the y was mistaken for a g (perhaps due to messy writing)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:252:D79:2010:AC87:1867:927F:3969 ( talk) 18:47, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Ginkgo biloba. 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.
An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked=
to true
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 03:24, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
A glance at this page from the University of Maryland Medical Center,
http://umm.edu/health/medical/altmed/herb/ginkgo-biloba
which includes numerous supporting publications, gives an entirely different picture of ginkgo biloba, one that emphasizes its value in medicine. The Wikipedia article, however, is relentlessly negative. Without taking sides, it is clear that the Wikipedia article needs to have a balanced viewpoint. That is completely lacking in the current version and that is why I will mark this article as biased until it has a NPOV. Busterbarker2008 ( talk) 14:05, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
NPOV tag restored as it will continue to be until this article has a NPOV. "Neutrality here at Wikipedia is all about presenting competing versions of what the facts are. It doesn't matter at all how convinced we are that our facts are the facts. If a significant number of other interested parties really do disagree with us, no matter how wrong we think they are, the neutrality policy dictates that the discussion be recast as a fair presentation of the dispute between the parties." Busterbarker2008 ( talk) 12:18, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
When to use: Place this template on an article when you have identified a serious issue of balance and the lack of a WP:Neutral point of view, and you wish to attract editors with different viewpoints to the article. Please also explain on the article's talk page why you are adding this tag, identifying specific issues that are actionable within Wikipedia's content policies.- and:
This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. You may remove this template whenever any one of the following is true: There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved; it is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given; in the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.
The MayoClinic entries on dietary supplements are not written by Mayo healthcare professionals. Note at end identifies the contract company. And as pointed out by Peter Coxhead and others, even the few indications given a "B" ranking all end with recommendation that more research is needed. David notMD ( talk) 10:29, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Ginkgo biloba. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:00, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
-Ginkgo is widely used in Europe for treating dementia. At first, doctors thought it helped because it improves blood flow to the brain. Now research suggests it may protect nerve cells that are damaged in Alzheimer disease. Several studies show that ginkgo has a positive effect on memory and thinking in people with Alzheimer disease or vascular dementia.
Studies suggest that ginkgo may help people with Alzheimer disease:
Improve thinking, learning, and memory (cognitive function) Have an easier time performing daily activities Improve social behavior Have fewer feelings of depression Several studies have found that ginkgo may work as well as some prescription Alzheimer disease medications to delay the symptoms of dementia. It has not been tested against all of the drugs prescribed to treat Alzheimer disease. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.116.244.88 ( talk) 01:34, 26 February 2018 (UTC)