This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Alternative medicine This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Alternative medicine related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Alternative medicineWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative medicineTemplate:WikiProject Alternative medicineAlternative medicine articles Pharmacology Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Skepticism Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Alternative Views Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative views, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of significant alternative views in every field, from the sciences to the humanities. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.Alternative ViewsWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative ViewsTemplate:WikiProject Alternative ViewsAlternative Views articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Russia Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Russia, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of Russia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Soviet Union Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Dietary Supplements Low‑importance Adaptogen is part of WikiProject Dietary Supplements, a collaborative attempt at improving the coverage of topics related to dietary supplements. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Dietary SupplementsWikipedia:WikiProject Dietary SupplementsTemplate:WikiProject Dietary SupplementsDietary supplement articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Adaptogen. PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles) The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine. Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

One of the references is unused due to a section being deleted without removing the reference from the reflist as well. This throws errors so I removed it, but I will leave a copy here for anyone who wants to further consult it and/or add it back at a later time.

Panossian, A.; Wagner, H. (October 2005). 
"Stimulating effect of adaptogens: An overview with particular reference to their efficacy following single dose administration" (PDF). Phytotherapy Research. 19 (10): 819–838. 
doi:
10.1002/ptr.1751. 
PMID 
16261511. 

also here:  
http://www.scicompdf.se/adaptogener/panossian_3.pdf

StressOverStrain ( talk) 18:52, 27 July 2015 (UTC) reply

The sources are all primary sources, and are all assume that adaptogens are a well defined termed with a well defined effect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Petergstrom ( talk • contribs) 21:42, 28 November 2016 (UTC) reply

This edit is the same material previously added by AlexanderPanossian and discussed on his Talk page, here. I reverted the same material added today by an IP user and warn that this might be a WP:SOCK. -- Zefr ( talk) 17:22, 27 July 2017 (UTC) reply

This section was reverted: the term adaptogen has become more widely recognized by health authorities, for instance, by the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA). ^[1] The term is not recognized by health authorities; it is used as an example of a prohibited term when referring to agents with unproven effects that produce a warning letter for false health claims by the FDA. Placing for discussion here. User Anonymous.psy has a suspected conflict of interest as the surrogate or author, Alexander Panossian WP:COI. Please do not edit war; user is warned. -- Zefr ( talk) 23:08, 26 August 2017 (UTC) reply

Anonymous.psy ( talk) 23:28, 26 August 2017 (UTC)I am an independent researcher (User:Anonymous.psy) and I am new to wikipedia. I do not understand why you are warning me (User:Zefr). I guarantee that there is no conflict of interest and I am not associated with Alexander Panossian. Zefr should first review the evidence in an objective scientific manner. The FDA used the term in the following official document: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-1998-04-29/pdf/98-11294.pdf (please see page 23627). This is a fact which is also mentioned in a document published by the European Medicines Agency Evaluation of Medicines for Human Use, see http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2009/09/WC500003646.pdf (page 3) reply

Yes the FDA used the term. The Federal Register notice said : "Claiming that a product was in a class that is not recognizable to health care professionals or consumers as intended for use to diagnose, mitigate, treat, cure or prevent disease (e.g., an ‘‘energizer,’’ a ‘‘rejuvenative,’’ a ‘‘revitalizer,’’ or an ‘‘adaptogen’’) would not constitute a disease claim under this criterion." What the FDA did there was say that the term is as meaningless and snake-oil-ish as "energizer". The EMA says something similar: "The principle of an adaptogenic action needs further clarification and studies in the pre-clinical and clinical area. As such, the term is not accepted in pharmacological and clinical terminology that is commonly used in the EU. "

Both of these sources say, in a nice and formal way, "garbage marketing term that actual science doesn't recognize, used to sell shit." Jytdog ( talk) 03:28, 27 August 2017 (UTC) reply

Useless shit. Real shit actually has some value. My opinion here is that there are nigh on 30 herbal ingredients used in TCM, Ayurvedic medicine and Western herbal medicine that have been loosely classified as 'adaptogens.' Each individually may contain bioactives that can be assessed via clinical trials, but there is no strong evidence for commonality. David notMD ( talk) 11:48, 30 August 2017 (UTC) reply

This is almost entirely unsourced. Moved here per WP:PRESERVE. Per WP:BURDEN pls don't restore without finding reliable sources, checking the content against them, and citing then.

Supposed adaptogenic plants

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources in this section. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. Find sources:  "Adaptogen" –  news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (July 2017) ( Learn how and when to remove this message)

There is dispute in the herbal community regarding what qualifies as an adaptogen. However, the following may qualify: ^{citation needed}

• American Ginseng (Panax quinquefolius), root
• Ashwagandha (Withania somnifera), root
• Asian Ginseng (Panax ginseng), root
• Cordyceps (Cordyceps sinensis), mushroom/mycelium
• Dang Shen (Codonopsis pilosula, C. tangshen), root
• Eleuthero (Eleutherococcus senticosus), root/stem bark
• Green Chirayta (Andrographis paniculata), leaves ^[1]
• Guduchi (Tinospora cordifolia), root/stem
• Holy Basil (Ocimum sanctum, O. gratissimum), herb
• Jiaogulan (Gynostemma pentaphyllum), herb
• Jujube (Ziziphus jujuba), fruit
• Licorice (Glycyrrhiza glabra, G. uralensis), root
• Reishi (Ganoderma ludicum), mushroom/mycelium
• Rhaponticum (Rhaponticum carthamoides), root
• Rhodiola (Rhodiola rosea), root
• Schisandra (Schisandra chinensis), fruit/seed
• Siberian Ginseng (Eleutherococcus Senticosus), root,
• Shilajit (Asphaltum bitumen), pitch ^[2]
• Shiitake (Lentinula edodes)

-- Jytdog ( talk) 18:34, 15 October 2017 (UTC) reply

What is ref name=winston for Shilajit ?

Could add Tulsi, and Maca ( lepidium meyenii).

Presumably a list referencing the original Soviet 1947 publications would be reliable for this article. - Rod57 ( talk) 19:11, 3 November 2017 (UTC) reply

I have removed the warnings, as after seven years the issues no longer appear to be present. All of the remaining citations appear to pertain to the text, and there are no unsubstantiated medical references. The term adaptogen as applied to plants, herbs, or even chemicals appears to be an unproven concept. The term is generally defined as "helping the body adapt to stress," but there is no precise definition on just what that means, and the type of stress involved in not always specified. There are very few proposed mechanisms for how adaptogens help in the response to stress. There don't seem to be any well-defined, random controlled, double-blinded studies demonstrating the affect. Both the term itself and just how such substances function need to be better defined before any conclusions about their efficacy can be drawn. JimGibson1 ( talk) 20:18, 26 October 2020 (UTC) reply

Good points.

That first sentence looks in-world and perhaps a FRINGE vio. -- Hipal/Ronz ( talk) 21:31, 26 October 2020 (UTC) reply

Yes. The dubious citations have been cleaned up in the intervening years, so the flags are obsolete. And I agree that we could probably do better with the first sentence. In particular, the use of that 1964 review to provide the current status of use is problematic, both because it is quite dated, and because it was written by a proponent rather than a neutral independent voice. Agricolae ( talk) 21:51, 26 October 2020 (UTC) reply