Talk:Turmeric

American Spelling (and DMY Dates)

Recently an IP editor added a "u" to savory/savoury. @Zefr has deleted these with the edit summary "no value to the extra vowel".I'll leave it to the linguists to decide whether surplus vowels in British variant spellings have value.)

From a PAG perspective, WP:RETAIN says Zefr is presumptively right - this should be kept as US-variant absent consensus to the contrary. But given the strong historical ties to India and other commonwealth and former commonwealth countries (plus former Oceania British Possessions) is this appropriate? WP:TIES says strong historical ties count, and India certainly uses British variant spelling. The strongest U.S. ties may be its contribution to health-claim debunking.

Also is there an inconsistency between having a DMY date code (which usually signifies non-U.S.) and US-variant spelling? Of course, there are no dates in the article body.... Oblivy (talk) 22:45, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

For words such as flavor, color, savory, and others, the article has long been styled in American English. Other than my edit summary correctly stating the useless value of the British "u" in spelling and pronouncing these words, I was following MOS:ENGVAR and MOS:CONSISTENT. Zefr (talk) 23:35, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, no argument with the consistency argument. But a spice with historical ties to the subcontinent and commonwealth gets American English spelling? I'm posting this because we can make the change with consensus. Oblivy (talk) 00:17, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Agree, that's WP:CON. Zefr (talk) 00:40, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

Turmeric and cancer

Refer your this and this reverts.

Bon courage please discuss here your objections. DwilfaStudwell (talk) 07:49, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

We don't want WP:MDPI journals when there are good quality sources available. Also removing

Although long used in Ayurvedic medicine, there is no high-quality clinical evidence that consuming turmeric or curcumin is effective for treating any disease.

and replacing it with some factoid about cancer cell lines in the lede seems WP:PROFRINGE. Bon courage (talk) 07:54, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

And, I didn't utilize MDPI in my edits. DwilfaStudwell (talk) 08:05, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Err, in this[1] edit you removed good content from the lede and replaced it with something sourced to PMID:38791211 (and, even though this is a weak source, you managed to cherry pick it so as to misrepresent its conclusion.) Bon courage (talk) 08:12, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Additionally I have also cited Asia Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention and Journal of Indian Academy of Oral Medicine and Radiology which you reverted without any edit summary

We can play the "good content" & "weak source" till the doomsday without a conclusion.

Why dont we settle this amicably citing both the sources of conflict. As far as LEADBOMB is considered , I understand that effect of turmuric on cancer to be added in the article before adding to the lead. DwilfaStudwell (talk) 08:34, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Also untrue. The edit summary was "Undue WP:LEDEBOMB". There is no reliable source saying that tumeric has an effect "on cancer", except in the XKCD way.[2] which will never be due for the lede (or maybe anywhere). Bon courage (talk) 08:38, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

XKCD sarcasm was not good in taste.

Asia Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention & Journal of Indian Academy of Oral Medicine and Radiology are peer reviewed journals DwilfaStudwell (talk) 08:45, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

RfC on health benefits of turmuric

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Even if all materials listed by the OP unequivocally meet our heightened WP:MEDRS standard required for verifying medical claims, said materials only serve to verify medical claims being made about an altogether distinct substance than the one this article is about. There's nothing left to do but WP:SNOW close here. Remsense ‥ 论 07:10, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

---

Evidence-based research papers indicate effects of turmuric on health. The following are the references.

1. Anticancer Properties of Curcumin Against Colorectal Cancer: A Review: Natural compounds, such as curcumin, have shown significant anti-colorectal cancer characteristics among medications that can be used to treat CRC. These chemicals are phenolic compounds that belong to the curcuminoids category.
2. Polyphenols such as curcumin (Cur) and resveratrol (Res) have been recently shown to have potential to inhibit proliferation of highly aggressive melanoma cells.
3. In vitro studies performed on different gastrointestinal cancerous cell lines have shown that curcumin can inhibit cell growth through cycle arrest at the G2/M and G1 phases, as well as stimulated apoptosis and autophagy by interacting with multiple molecular targets.
4. Curcumin, derived from the plant Curcuma longa, represents one such option that has a long history of its use for a variety of chronic disease including cancer, in Indian ayurvedic and traditional Chinese medicine. Scientific evidence over the past few decades have overwhelmingly shown that curcumin exhibits a multitude of anti-cancer activities orchestrated through key signaling pathways associated with cancer.
5. Clinical trial showed that 90 milligrams of curcumin taken twice a day for 18 months helped improve memory performance in adults without dementia.
6. Curcumin, a yellow pigment from Curcuma longa, is a major component of turmeric and is commonly used as a spice and food-coloring agent. It is also used as a cosmetic and in some medical preparations. The desirable preventive or putative therapeutic properties of curcumin have also been considered to be associated with its antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties.

Requesting comments for inclusion of health benefits of turmuric in this page. DwilfaStudwell (talk) 05:43, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Responses

• No obviously because the sources given are about curcumin which is not tumeric, and which has its own distinct article. More generally Wikipedia requires WP:MEDRS for claims of "health benefits" and many of these sources fail that standard. Core policy (i.e. WP:V) cannot be overturned with a RfC. If WP:RFCBEFORE has been observed, this waste-of-time could have been avoided. Bon courage (talk) 05:52, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
• No No WP:MEDRS sources showing health benefits for tumeric. And even curcumin doesn't tout health benefits, Instead is says "Factors that limit the bioactivity of curcumin or its analogs include chemical instability, water insolubility, absence of potent and selective target activity, low bioavailability, limited tissue distribution, and extensive metabolism. Very little curcumin escapes the GI tract and most is excreted in feces unchanged", "Although curcumin has been assessed in numerous laboratory and clinical studies, it has no medical uses established by well-designed clinical research" and it "has not been successful in any clinical trial." Meters (talk) 06:05, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
• No The reasons stated in the first two responses cover it. From my brief research the curcumin issue is key.Lukewarmbeer (talk) 06:47, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Discussion

Note 1: Curcumin is a biologically active phytochemical substance present in turmeric DwilfaStudwell (talk) 07:04, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

Yes, Wikipedia has an article on it (hint: not this one): Curcumin. Bon courage (talk) 06:57, 25 September 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

OP indef'ed as NOTHERE, and then block converted to a CU block. Meters (talk) 21:03, 30 September 2024 (UTC)