This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Superfood article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
The contents of the Superfruit page were merged into Superfood on 29 November 2015. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Would superfoods be foods at least 2 standard deviations above the mean? The concept is belittled rather than treated neutrally. 66.64.72.10 ( talk) 23:12, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
I have removed the following two statements that contradict each other:
For example, some seaweeds hailed as superfoods contain natural toxins which are thought by some to increase risk of cancer and liver damage.<ref name= "Hill2007"/> This statement is however incorrect, the cited article refers to Microcystin, which are produced by certain freshwater cyanobacteria (not seaweeds). Thusfar no poisonous seaweeds have been discovered according to [http://www.seaweed.ie/ The Seaweed Site].
I'm putting them here for discussion. Deli nk ( talk) 00:10, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
How about a different example from the same source ( https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/may/13/health.healthandwellbeing1) that can be verified by MEDRS sources:
Spencer points to the case of beta carotene which, eaten in its natural form, appears to work as an anti-oxidant, killing the free radicals in our bodies which can damage DNA and initiate cancers. When the compound was separated by scientists and ingested as a dietary supplement, however, it was found to increase the risk of certain cancers.
Of course, we're not going to use that quote. -- Ronz ( talk) 15:58, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Superfood. 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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:46, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
I'm taking a break from this article, but I have to say that it is leaving some stuff out. To be a full and complete article on this topic, it needs to address the following:
@ Alexbrn: I spent a bit editing the article to make it read better.
Please address the 3 changes of substance you disagree with here:
And if agreement cannot be reached, then let the c.e. changes stand. Bod ( talk) 20:24, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
This article from LiveScience ( https://www.livescience.com/34693-superfoods.html) maybe shows how a good article on the topic should be structured and what should be covered. To summarize the structure:
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Superfood article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but
graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at
pageviews.wmcloud.org |
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
The contents of the Superfruit page were merged into Superfood on 29 November 2015. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Would superfoods be foods at least 2 standard deviations above the mean? The concept is belittled rather than treated neutrally. 66.64.72.10 ( talk) 23:12, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
I have removed the following two statements that contradict each other:
For example, some seaweeds hailed as superfoods contain natural toxins which are thought by some to increase risk of cancer and liver damage.<ref name= "Hill2007"/> This statement is however incorrect, the cited article refers to Microcystin, which are produced by certain freshwater cyanobacteria (not seaweeds). Thusfar no poisonous seaweeds have been discovered according to [http://www.seaweed.ie/ The Seaweed Site].
I'm putting them here for discussion. Deli nk ( talk) 00:10, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
How about a different example from the same source ( https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/may/13/health.healthandwellbeing1) that can be verified by MEDRS sources:
Spencer points to the case of beta carotene which, eaten in its natural form, appears to work as an anti-oxidant, killing the free radicals in our bodies which can damage DNA and initiate cancers. When the compound was separated by scientists and ingested as a dietary supplement, however, it was found to increase the risk of certain cancers.
Of course, we're not going to use that quote. -- Ronz ( talk) 15:58, 6 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Superfood. 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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:46, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
I'm taking a break from this article, but I have to say that it is leaving some stuff out. To be a full and complete article on this topic, it needs to address the following:
@ Alexbrn: I spent a bit editing the article to make it read better.
Please address the 3 changes of substance you disagree with here:
And if agreement cannot be reached, then let the c.e. changes stand. Bod ( talk) 20:24, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
This article from LiveScience ( https://www.livescience.com/34693-superfoods.html) maybe shows how a good article on the topic should be structured and what should be covered. To summarize the structure: