Talk:Amanita muscaria/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2

Santa Claus and mushrooms

I'm gonna call shenanigans on the Amanita Muscaria/Santa Claus stuff. Can anyone provide references? Sneftel 08:04, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Nevermind, found some. Looks like Jonathan Ott suggested it. I edited the section to source, and to remove weasel words. Sneftel 08:36, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

In reference to the Santa Claus section: "With its generally red and white color scheme, he argues that Santa Claus's suit is related to the mushroom."

Yes and No! First off for centuries Siberia Shamans dress up in red and white suits. While the Amanita Muscaria (Red and White) was used primarily to acheive a trance state for religious purposes for Siberia Shamans. Also Siberan Reindeers have been known to eat Amanita Muscaria. That is were Reindeers fly come in because the mushrooms takes you on a euphoria trip. Now the Santa Claus's red suit is a purely American, turn of the 20th Century phenomenon created by Coca Cola. Although the association of the red-suited Santa to amanita muscaria is a common legend among the entheogenic sub-culture. There is a similar resemblances between Siberia Shaman's red and white suits and Santa Claus's red suit. Note there is no history ties between the two red and white suits. Before the 1920s, European renditions of Santa Claus has him wearing green or purple, even blue. Sometimes red, the red and white classical costume has been more popular even from European vintage Art of Saint Nicholas. If you check out wikipedia's Saint Nicholas page, you can see the variation of images.[1] giggle 02:13, 9 December 2010 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gregory.george.lewis (talk • contribs)

edibility (he added stuf latly 17/09/2006)

Any one who is editing this part of the page needs to read rubel and arora: edibility, bias and amanita muscaria from the journal economic botany. They outline the history of edibility and the science behind it. --128.120.107.4 (talk) 20:03, 4 March 2010 (UTC)


Down enof you can reed in the link:

My own interest in Amanita muscaria is culinary. My interest was piqued many years ago when I read a field guide that said that while the mushroom is poisonous, in Japan it is pickled and eaten as food. After reading this I called my mycologist friend, David Arora, author of Mushrooms Demystified, and All the Rain Promises, and more. David lists AAmanita muscaria as poisonous in the current editions of his books. The first reference book David turned to after I called him said that the mushroom is poisonous, but that the author had a friend who eats it regularly with no ill effects. Stating that Amanita muscaria is poisonous, but that it is commonly eaten as food by a friend or by people somewhere else, is a recurring feature of books on mushrooms. As early as 1900, George Atkins wrote in his book, Studies of American Fungi, that while the mushroom is “deadly as ordinarily found,” it is eaten “. . . as food in parts of France & Russia, and it has been eaten repeatedly in certain localities in this country without harm.”

Foreign authors write in the same vein. A recent Lithuanian field guide states that the mushroom is poisonous, but that it is eaten in the mountains of France and Austria. The most popular Italian field guide, Bruno Cetto’s I funghi dal vero, volume 1 says that muscaria is poisonous, but that it is eaten cooked and pickled in Russia, France, and in the Lake Garda region of the Italian Alps.

So, what is going on? First, there is the old semantic problem that by custom all mushrooms are labeled poisonous, whether they might make you a little sick or whether they might send you to your grave. Also, no effort is made to clarify whether a mushroom’s ill effects are countered by cooking — which they often are. While field guides are accurate guides to classification, in the area of edibility, they can be more of a guide to local preference and prejudice than scientifically accurate.

So i think is enof as a source.--Pixel ;-) 23:15, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

There are some Amanitas which are edible, and maybe some geographic variations which are edibel too, however for the most part teh fly agaric is hallucinogenic as well as moderately poisonous unless you spend a deal of time preparing it (which can be done), however why would you bother unless you wanted to hallucinate? I just realised how tricky a topic this is in terms of liability etc.......Cas Liber 07:15, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
no this is about eating it as normal food.Ther are many examples of poisonos food that are perfectly edible after they wher prepared properly.--Pixel ;-) 20:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Mythology and religion NPOV tag

I tagged this section over the treatment of the Soma issue and Allegro's Sacred Mushroom and the Cross.

"Amanita muscaria is widely thought to be the Soma talked about in Rig Veda of India"

"Widely thought" by whom? One reference – to Wasson. Does that constitute "widely thought"? In fact, there are quite a few Vedic scholars who disagree with Wasson on this, so the above statement really needs to be qualified and better referenced.

The fact that the article only has one reference does not mean that other scholars who agree with Wasson do not exist. Tchoutoye 01:50, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

"John Marco Allegro argues in The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross that the Christian religion is derived from a sex and psychedelic mushroom cult."

This isn't quite as egregious, however, it leaves out the fact that Allegro's theory is considered to be a fringe idea among the vast majority of biblical scholars. Having the above be an unqualified statement is a bit like having a similarly unqualified statement by a creationist scholar concerning some point of evolutionary biology or historical geology. Peter G Werner 05:28, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

I've taken the tag off of the section as a whole (which is overall more or less balanced) and tagged the statements themselves as "opinion needs balancing". Peter G Werner 05:40, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Allegro's methodology may have been reckless, but he is not the only person to find traces of Amanita muscaria use in Judaeo-Christianity. Others include Dan Merkur, Clark Heinrich and Carl Ruck, imho an impeccable classicist scholar. Tchoutoye 01:39, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

The etymology of Vedic "Soma" as a loanword from Finno-Uralic has been proposed by a Baltic language philologist J. Pashka. He cites widespread existing Finno-Uralic examples - Volgaic Erzya, Mokša "Sjuma / Səma" hewn wooden trough, Estonian "Soim" hewn wooden manger, Khanty "Soma" mortar - which he contends were objects used in production of an Amanita muscaria beverage by the Ural Mountains. He also cites loanswords from a pre-Vedic Indo-Iranian language into many of the same Finno-Uralic languages (ie: Finnish "Kekri") which he correlates with archaeological data to support his proposed etymology of Vedic "Soma" from Finno-Uralic. In one of his books (Aramaic Gospels & Acts - Text and Translation), it mentions that he was formally schooled in Sanskrit at the University of Arizona. I found it by Googling "Soma" and "Uralic". It is a much better supported etymology of Vedic "Soma" than the one Wiki offers. Sudowite 02:12, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to add the reference then. Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:20, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
I don't edit Wiki articles anymore, but just add to Discussions. To quote the proposal, "Indo-Aryan "Soma" preserved the native Uralic word for a hewn wooden trough that was used as the dried Fly Agaric (Amanita muscaria) was pressed with stones in water. (re: Khanty "Soma" )" - from Virdainas © 1994, 2nd Edition, by Jos. Pashka. It is an interesting perspective. Sudowite 11:27, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

The toxicity section is all over the place! & tripping

It's very clear there are a multitude of people and opinions at work in this section. It's difficult to assess the actual harm potential of the species. I'm also dubious about the word poisonous being used alongside psychoactive in the first sentence. Every other drug article I've seen over the years (which must be literally hundreds by now) has only ever mentioned psychoactivity, yet all of them have been poisonous in similar doses to the compounds in this.

The word poisonous implies, to me, that eating a regular or small quantity of them will kill you. As the kind of people who go round eating these are looking to trip, they'll be eating a couple of them, not 15+. In that sense, they're not poisonous in the same way that hundreds of drugs aren't 'poisonous' within their dosage thresholds. They're not always good for you, but using the word poisonous implies the regular quantities of them used will cause death.

Virtually everything around you, like table salt, is poisonous when consumed in excess. The word is heavily tied to the quantity. e.g. 'a poisonous dose'.

I understand what the authors are getting at, but the word is a little misleading.

Also, if you're planning to trip from these things, do yourself a favor and go straight to Pantherina, it's exponentially more powerful. Muscaria do absolutely nothing to me. I don't even get a stomach upset. Pantherina has blown me into a whole world of confusion. And DO NOT try picking Pantharina yourself, as they're easy to confuse with phalloids, which are poisonous in the quantities you'll be eating them. A Pantherina trip is nothing like Psilocybe and involves zero hallucinations for me, it's more like my memory is stuck in a loop. It's not a particularly fun, colorful or exciting trip if you're after something like Psilocybe or LSD. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.24.47.178 (talk) 03:45, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

The convention in just about every mushroom textbook and guidebook is that the term 'poisonous' gets used for anything more than the mildest of stomach upsets. When they are deadly, they are called "deadly poisonous". As many folks get gastrointestinal symptoms, and for an unsuspecting person, feeling unexepectedly drunk and /or hallucinating would qualify as well. So toxicity sort of depends on the taker really. Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:03, 5 May 2010 (UTC)

alice in wonderland sculpture

As far as I am concerned, this flat out does not belong in this article. 1) it is not even in the same genus. 2) To say that the "reference remains clear" is original research unless cited. Maybe it has a place in Psilocybin mushroom. de Bivort 17:05, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

  • I will find some good citations and replace it. prat (talk) 04:41, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Please put it in an article about a mushroom it depicts once you get those citations. de Bivort 05:29, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
  • I've updated it now, please have a look. I do think the image, considering the cultural significance and background of the artwork in question (regardless of botanical authenticity of representation), is clearly relevant under the cultural section of this article. prat (talk) 05:46, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
  • I don't find its inclusion as objectionable now. The references certainly help. I still think it should appear in a general article on halucinogenic mushrooms - unless the inference that Caroll was referring to muscaria is more than speculative.. de Bivort 20:58, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
  • The reference I added noted that people intoxicated with A. muscaria noted size distortion, which then relates to Alice's distorted size (though clearly inverted from perception to fictional beholder-reality). This article is blessed with alot of images - I am happy either way. Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:23, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Well the issue is simple. If we, as editors, are noting that muscaria causes size distortions and inferring that Carroll was invoking muscaria in the book, that's original research. If there is a reliable source which makes that inference, then we can include it. de Bivort 16:07, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
  • The book made the inference connecting the two phenomena (not me). Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:45, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
  • Well, sounds like everything is in order then :) I feel bad about being a stickler on this point, it's just there better be a good reason to include a picture of a mushroom which clearly isn't A muscaria in the A muscaria article. People conflate mushrooms enough in their minds as it is. de Bivort 20:59, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
  • No, its good someone is a stickler now and then. I should be able to explain every edit I make (and I did, so there :)) and we need to avoid OR. Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

File:Amanita muscaria After Rain.jpg to appear as POTD soon

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Amanita muscaria After Rain.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on July 9, 2010. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2010-07-09. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! howcheng {chat} 18:24, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Amanita muscaria
A mature specimen of the poisonous Amanita muscaria mushroom. Native throughout the temperate and boreal regions of the Northern Hemisphere, it has been unintentionally introduced to many countries in the Southern Hemisphere and is now a true cosmopolitan species. It is a large white-gilled, white-spotted, usually deep red mushroom, one of the most recognizable and widely encountered in popular culture. Its specific name comes from the Latin musca, meaning "fly", as it was known to be an insecticide when crushed in milk. The mushroom is edible after neutralizing the toxins by parboiling, but Amanita muscaria is now primarily famed for its hallucinogenic properties.Photo: Noodle snacks
Archive – More featured pictures...

Obscure reference in the movie Alien

A button on the key panel of the self-destruct console is clearly labeled "AGARIC FLY" (at approximately 1:35:27). Curious, I naturally searched wikipedia and was interested to learn that it refers to a hallucinogenic mushroom. Apparently, the set designers wanted to pay this mushroom homage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.253.105.39 (talk) 10:40, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Wow, I had not seen that. Question is, does an independent commentary discuss it...here's hoping...I'll chase it up Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:49, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

More importantly i see nowhere where mario is mentioned

i see nowhere in the article where its said where mario gets his berzerker rage or and grows from eating mushrooms :x —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.162.32.182 (talk) 19:59, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

It is mentioned :) J Milburn (talk) 20:04, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Psychoactive use section

"Professor Marija Gimbutas, the renowned Lithuanian prehistorian, had reported to R. Gordon Wasson on the use down to our own day of Amanita muscaria in the remoter parts of Lithuania at wedding feasts and the like when the mushrooms were mixed with vodka, and also how the Lithuanians used to export quantities of A. muscaria to the Lapps in the Far North for use in their shamanic practices. Here in the Lithuanian festivities was the only report that Wasson had received of the ingestion of the fly-agaric in Eastern Europe for jollification ends.[89]"

Could this be ironed out a little? I tried to do it myself, but I'm not even sure what the last line means. J Milburn (talk) 22:03, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

The last line means that people who ingest them tend to break out into spontaneous song and dance, like Julie Andrews. Fly Agarics are the mean and ends to achieving "Jollification". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.85.182.93 (talk) 10:34, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

I would re-word the last sentence as "This is the only account Wasson received (or, could find) regarding the recreational ingestion of fly-agaric (or, Amanita muscaria) in Eastern Europe." "This" refers to Gimbutas' report of the use of fly-agaric at Lithuanian wedding celebrations in the previous sentence. --Floozybackloves (talk) 03:50, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Amanita muscaria Marriott Falls 1.jpg to appear as POTD soon

Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Amanita muscaria Marriott Falls 1.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on December 4, 2010. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2010-12-04. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :) Thanks! howcheng {chat} 18:31, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Amanita muscaria
Two immature Amanita muscaria mushrooms, a poisonous and psychoactive basidiomycete fungus found throughout the world. Its main psychoactive constituent is the compound muscimol, an alkaloid that occurs naturally in Amanita species. It was used as an intoxicant and entheogen by the peoples of Siberia and has a religious significance in these cultures.Photo: Noodle snacks
Archive – More featured pictures...

"Bugs"

The fourth paragraph of the "Taxonomy and naming" section says:

...getting rid of bugs...

Does "bugs" here mean bedbugs specifically (often termed simply "bugs"), or does it mean insect pests in general?

If the former, then I suggest the wording be amended to read "bedbugs". If the latter, then "insect pests" would be a more informative word than "bugs".

It is possible that the reference for this assertion simply reads "bugs" but since that volume is a scientific work, the meaning is almost certainly "bedbugs".

--Floozybackloves (talk) 03:41, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

I have never seen 'bugs' as an abbreviated term for 'bedbugs'. Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:57, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Toxicity

So, what's the lethal dose? In the wiki article it gives two different amounts. At first it states that a single cap is all it would take, then further down it actually says that it would take up to 15! anybody know? Thanks (DieselBeetle (talk) 01:35, 13 April 2011 (UTC))

I've heard this mushroom can be made considerably less toxic by cooking it first. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ashley Y (talk • contribs) 09:33, 11 November 2003.
Reply to above: That's because the ibotenic acid is converted to muscimol by cooking. Muscimol doesn't produce the toxic effects of ibotenic acid. Also, I wonder if amanita var. guessowii is mistaken for amanita var. formosa in the US? Look at the pictures: http://pluto.njcc.com/~ret/amanita/species/muscgues.html - Exspecto 04:23, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Ibotemic acid IS converted to muscimol by heating and drying the mushroom. But heating, e.g. by grilling or sauteeing, is only one form of cooking. Ibotemic acid is water soluble so that if you boil it the ibotemic acid is actually removed from the flesh of the mushroom rendering it edible. Thus, one has to differentiate between cooking methods. Boiling for a long time and tossing the water and then rinsing eliminates the toxins while grilling (or drying) concentrates them. William Rubel (talk) 10:30, 11 February 2009 (UTC)William Rubel

I miss any mention of amanitin - probably the most toxic substance im amanita. Mykhal 15:03, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

That's because there are no amanitins or related compounds in Amanita muscaria. You're thinking of Amanita phalloides and the various species of destroying angel. Peter G Werner 00:29, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Is there any evidence of the fatal cases? I've been searching information about this and some sites say that there aren't any known deaths caused by Amanita Muscaria. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.186.144.210 (talk • contribs) 19:11, 30 April 2005.

After working for a year on the article I wrote with David Arora for the peer review journal "Economic Botany" (see article for full reference) there seems to be no documented case of a fatality from "A. muscaria." Modern works on mushroom poisoning, at least in North America, tend to combine poisoning cases by A. muscaria with those of A. pantherina, a mushroom with even more ibotemic acid in it. The most cited case of an alleged mushroom fatality in the 20th century was that of Count de Vecchi, legate to the Italian Embassy in Washington, D.C. in the 1890s. His death, allegedly by A. muscaria poisoning is not documented with enough precision to determine cause of death. I think it is safe to say that that there is no documented case of a death by poisoning by "A. muscaria." The fact that it is widely used as an intoxicant with no reference to risk of death is probably all the empirical evidence one needs to demonstrate that it is not poisonous in the sense of deadly. William Rubel (talk) 10:30, 11 February 2009 (UTC)William Rubel

  • I don't know if any of you have played Metal Gear Solid 3, but in that game, if you eat one of these mushrooms, you fall asleep almost immediately. Would that really happen? scaryice 30 Jul 2004
No. Nandesuka 13:52, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
So I'm guessing I shouldn't try it out, huh? scaryice 05:08, 31 July 2005
For more information check out [1] 07 September 2006


Cheers, Steve —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.71.62.40 (talk • contribs) 23:06, 12 December 2005

REMOVED-WP:NOTHOWTO, WP:FORUM ^


  • The Fly Agaric is much less toxic than is widely thought. Deaths are extremely rare. In fact, some shops even sell muscaria extracts.--ha-core 12:09, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

==>You can detoxify this mushroom by boiling it in water 7-10 minutes and then discarding the water. This also removes any hallucinogens. :) Failing to detoxify the mushroom will cause liver damage! You can get high on these but the damage you do to yourself with the associated toxins make it unrecommended for that purpose. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Debivort (talk • contribs) 05:18, 7 March 2006

"Failing to detoxify the mushroom will cause liver damage!" << This statement is not true. 70.186.172.75
  • This statement "Failing to detoxify the mushroom will cause liver damage!" is given without reference and is contradictory to properly cited information. I suggest this information is therefore incorrect, and the author Debivort has made the mistake of confusing the liver-damaging effects of the toxin Amanitin, which although found in other members of the Amanita genus of mushrooms such as Phalloides (death cap), is not found in Amanita Muscaria. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kev (talk • contribs) 11.49, 4 March 2007
    • Um, I'm pretty sure I never wrote that. My only interaction with the edibility discussion has been to insist that references supporting the claim that boiling the mushrooms detoxifies them not be blatant links to original research. Debivort 22:21, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
      • Indeed, this [2] was my only edit to this page in march 06, as you can see in my talk contributions. I wonder how this got attributed to me. Debivort 22:25, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I have added reference to edibility by boiling to the main text citing the article I wrote with David Arora (Mushrooms Demystified) for Economc Botany, a peer review journal (2008). I plan to pay for lab studies this upcoming fall (2009) to demonstrate the efficacy of detoxification by boiling. Thus far, the only lab work has been done by Alan Phipps in his master's thesis, "Japanese Use of Beni-Tengu-Dake (Amanita muscaria) and the Efficacy of Traditional Detoxification Methods. Master's Thesis, Biology Department, Florida International University. This was a study of mushroom pickling -- and boiling and salting eliminated all the toxins. I have added this to the article.William Rubel (talk) 10:30, 11 February 2009 (UTC)William Rubel

  • There are two statements which appear to be contradictory: "However, drying may increase potency as the process facilitates the conversion of ibotenic acid to the more potent muscimol." and "If a fly agaric is eaten, it is usually not fresh, but in its dried or cooked form, where ibotenic acid is converted to the more stable and far less poisonous muscimol." The former has a citation but conflicts with information from this discussion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.14.239.167 (talk) 19:55, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

There is no contradiction here. The fact is that drying does convert ibotemic acid to muscomol in a process called decarboxylation. The earliest ethnographic reports of A. muscaria use in Siberia reports the use of dried specimens for the purposes of becoming intoxicated. Early sources also suggest that at least with the Siberian variety that swallowing dried caps first rolled into little balls, like pills, reduces stomach upset. As an aside, no early ethnographic reports suggested the use was related to shamanistic practices. They refer, for example, to wedding parties. William Rubel (talk) 10:41, 11 February 2009 (UTC)William Rubel


A fatal dose has been calculated at approximately 15 caps? That's not very scientific, yet it keeps being put back in the article. Deadly? umm.. no. Plain water can be deadly if you drink too much of it, should we treat it with the same pessimism?

Coma? I don't think so, it will produce a coma-like state if a very large quantity is ingested, but so will alcohol and a host of other drugs.

There's not any proof flies die from it, it merely stupefies them and they drown in the liquid. If you are child or have pre-existing health issues, it compounds the issue, but shouldn't negate the truth.

The fact is, in small doses, its a wonderful tonic, it can be used for a myriad of health issues. Ive tried to add this info with references, yet the big wigs continue to try to shut me down. This article is biased, contradictory and closed minded. But don't take it personal, its just status quo. Give the medicine back to the people! Fight the man! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Warriorsoul (talk • contribs) 15:31, 22 March 2009 (UTC)


12:47, 24 April 2011 (UTC)ProfMad12:47, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Amanita Muscaria IS A TOXIC mushroom - fact.

Amanita Muscaria IS NOT as toxic as A. Pantherina (Panther Cap), or cetainly, A. Phalloides (Destroying Angel). Though one should not compare the latter with anything. It is a 'Toxin Amongst Toxins'.

Eating Amanita Muscaria will make you ill - fact.

You MAY hallucinate, you may not. You May have a trance-like state, then again. YOU WILL feel ill & probably (hopefully) vomit.

Raw, washed, cooked, whatever, do NOT compare it with Psilocybe species, containing Psilocybin. These ARE hallucinogenic by anyone's definition.

Possibly, Vikings, after 10 Panther Caps, and some local brew, raped & pillaged with greater ferocity. Whipped into a frenzy, the 'Shaman' pukes & talks riddles of hidden truth - maybe.

However, IT IS NOT a 21st.Century Disco Love Drug - Fact.

IT does look, perhaps the most beautiful of mushrooms, and aesthetically 'fits the bill' of how a mind-altering mushroom, should look. Hence, Lewis Carrol drawings, (with the less glamorous Psilocybe).

In fact it does alter the mind, but not within the context of modern psychopharmacology.

Also, do not compare it, with Datura, Atropa or Hyosyamus species. Again, they have a different pharmacology, even if some of the parasympathomimetic toxic effects are mimicked.

What is the lethal dose? Only a Viking would 'stomach eating such a dose (I hope - 'normally'}, without vomiting, diarrhoea & delirium, preventing any such event. I know of no recorded deaths with A. Muscaria, alone.

12:47, 24 April 2011 (UTC)PRrofMad12:47, 24 April 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Profmad (talk • contribs)

Paragraph on toad etymology removed

I have removed the following paragraph:

The word toadstool in English does not refer to any particular species, yet it has a more definite specific connotation with A. muscaria in continental Europe. Yet another name is crapaudin in many parts of France, and a Basque term from Guipúzcoa and Biscay is amoroto, further there is Old Danish paddhe stool, Danish paddehat, Dutch padde(n) stoel, Middle Low German paddenstol, Scots paddockstool and German Krötenschwamm,[2] all alluding to toads.[3] The toad is thought to be associated with the mushroom because it symbolizes toxicity and chthonic forces in the same way that the serpent does.[4] Wasson proposed this was due to its being a shamanic and also taboo object and hence unable to be named specifically in ancient Celtic culture.[5] He speculates that the power of this taboo may have perpetuated its maligned reputation while other lethal fungi such as the death cap (A. phalloides) have had few cultural connotations throughout European history.[6] In addition, a common name from China is ha-ma chün, meaning "toad mushroom" (蛤蟆菌), although the toad does not carry a negative connotation in Chinese culture and symbolism.[7] An unusual name is the Japanese beni-tengu-take "scarlet long-nosed-goblin mushroom".[8]

  1. ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_nicholas
  2. ^ Niels Åge Nielsen, Dansk etymologisk Ordbog
  3. ^ Wasson, Soma:Divine Mushroom of Immortality, p 187.
  4. ^ Wasson, Soma:Divine Mushroom of Immortality, p 190.
  5. ^ Wasson, Soma:Divine Mushroom of Immortality, pp 190–91.
  6. ^ Wasson, Soma:Divine Mushroom of Immortality, p 192.
  7. ^ Wasson, Soma:Divine Mushroom of Immortality, p 189.
  8. ^ Cite error: The named reference Michelot03 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

Being Dutch, I happen to know that paddenstoel is a generic term for any mushroom, just like in English. See mushroom#Toadstools, which incidentally also mentions that the German krötenschwamm refers to the panther cap; see also e.g. a German website I found [3]. Likewise, in Danish, da:paddehat does not refer to a particular species, but is rather "a popular word for the fruit bodies of certain fungi that consist of a hat and a stem".

Since this whole paragraph builds on the incorrect idea that the fly agarica is related to toads in popular culture, I see no other option than to remove it entirily.

Han-Kwang (t) 09:52, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Do you have any sources for what you are saying? You essentially seem to have removed a well-sourced paragraph based on original research. J Milburn (talk) 12:09, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
The renowned Van Dale Dictionary of the Dutch language says so. I don't have similar references for Danish and German, so you'll have to do with some googling. Note that the word is indeed related to 'toad' in various languages, but that it is not specific to this particular mushroom. Han-Kwang (t) 19:44, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
I need to go re-read the book before commenting, and I think it might be worth looking at some other corellating material in other languages actually to get a consensus. Han-Kwang what is it usually called in Dutch? common and rarer names? Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:03, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
nl:vliegenzwam. This morning I also checked the 'Woordenboek der Nederlandse Taal', which tracks back Dutch words to their first documented usage centuries ago, and also there no mentioning of a red-with-white dots mushroom. (Paper version; I don't get the navigation in the WNT online version.) I found the Danish equivalent of WNT: Paddehat Ordbog over det danske sprog: "(populær) betegnelse for svampe af familien Agaricaceæ (hvis overjordiske frugtlegeme bestaar af en oftest kredsrund, skærmformet hat (3.8), der bæres af en til hattens underside fæstet stilk); især om slægten Agaricus L." -- loose translation: "popular term for mushrooms of the agaricacaæ family (with fruit bodies above earth consisting of a circular hat and a stem), especially the genus agaricus L." Han-Kwang (t) 18:34, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

One thing I guess I realised as I read Wasson was he did/does go out on a bit of a limb sometimes so that some of these statements are worth comparing with other sources. Much of the Soma stuff I was able to read conflicting viewpoints and reviews elsewhere, but it is good to have someone ferret out some other material. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:36, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Is this treatment correct?

Article states:

However, small doses of benzodiazepines should be used as they may worsen the respiratory depressant effects of muscimol.<ref>{{cite book | author = Brent, J.| coauthors = Wallace, K. L.; Burkhart, K. K.; Phillips, S. D.; Donovan, J. W. | title = Critical care toxicology: diagnosis and management of the critically poisoned patient | publisher = Elsevier Mosby | year = 2005 | location = Philadelphia, PA | pages = 1263–75 | isbn = 0-8151-4387-7}}</ref>

This sentence looks like it has a 'not' missing. Maybe somebody with access to the <ref> could check it. I don't want to change the sentence as I am not an expert in this area. HairyWombat 18:23, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it is correct, the wording is slightly confusing. I will change it to be easier to understand.Worm12ga (talk) 15:38, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

"Shamans Odin Hawk and Venus" ??

Is this seriously to be considered a reliable source?? -- 92.226.101.122 (talk) 13:41, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Spelling

Are we in American or Commonwealth spelling here? Because we are using both "colour" and "center" which shouldn't both occur in the same article. --MarchOrDie (talk) 10:24, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I looked and the article was written from the beginning (in 2002!) in British English. It needs to be tagged and edited to reflect this. --MarchOrDie (talk) 11:42, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
whoops - I think we were doing British English....so let's go with centre and colour....Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:53, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Ibotenic acid

I note that ibotenic acid is a neurotoxin, as the article says; but I don't see much coming up about the level of toxicity when taken orally. Very many researchers use it intracerebrally to damage specific spots near the injection site. I think that, given the social circumstances, it would be very useful to provide more warning prominently in the article if brain damage from oral use has been demonstrated, but I don't know if it has been. The sources cited for "toxicity" are offline and concern humans - but it doesn't look like any were in a position to evaluate whether brain damage had occurred. Has anyone seen about this while writing? Wnt (talk) 14:00, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Copyedit

This is really a superb article in almost every way. I enjoyed it very much and was very pleased by its completeness, but to be honest... I have to say that I was surprised it got to FA and onto the Main Page still very much needing a thorough copy-edit! I went through the whole thing making copyedits in every section, and adding some links where they were needed. Some of the copyedits were not subtle, but were obvious things, like changing "20th Century" to "20th century", and "middle east" to "Middle East". I see that User:MarchOrDie also did a lot of copyediting today.

We do have a Wikipedia Guild of Copyeditors and they are very good. I used them a few months ago to help get an article up to FA. May I perhaps suggest that before each FA goes onto the main page it gets a quick once-over from an experienced editor in the Guild ?

Still, as I said before... it's a really great article, so well done to everyone who worked on it. Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 17:47, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree with this. The ENGVAR problem I highlighted above was present when the article was promoted, which is unfortunate. While the coverage of the article is excellent, there were some major problems with the prose. "However" means "nevertheless" and is a word to avoid as far as possible when writing encyclopedia articles. I took out a bunch; there were other beauts there like "additionally", "in fact", and "incredibly". Words like this can be stripped out without affecting meaning, and therefore should be. Anyway, the article is looking a lot better now, but it's a shame this wasn't done before it went on the Main Page. --MarchOrDie (talk) 18:04, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
This article is one of the most highly-viewed in WP:FUNGI, so it tends to attract a lot of (not always helpful) edits. It was promoted in 2009, when the standards (for fungal articles, at least) were perhaps not as exacting as they are today, but yes, I agree it should have been copyedited before appearing on the mainpage. I now recall that the mainpage notification appeared on my watchlist a couple of weeks ago, but I totally forgot about it (a drawback of having a 10,000+ article watchlist!). Reading it again, I see it still needs quite a bit of copyediting, and also needs to be updated with recent developments from the past few years. I'll work on this after the main page editing flurry is over. Sasata (talk) 18:43, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
As the person who laboured on this the longest, I guess I'll add something - this one was one of the earliest articles I began buffing for Featured status but was frustratingly difficult to come together nicely. Fascinating how some articles do and some don't. Hence it reflects 2-3 years of work in dribs and drabs before its tilt at FA-hood. Standards were a little laxer and I might (in retrospect) nominated early just to get the damn thing over with rather than being 100% happy (can't recall now). I've never been too fussed with mainpage FAs being rough around the edges as if this brings people into editing all the better. Another thing that has kept my enthusiasm in check is the concern the whole species complex will be split into several taxa (which is highly likely), and how that will affect the article...but yeah, another on the to-do list. I'll just be happy if lots of folks look at it and learn something about mushrooms. Might be worth looking at pageviews of a few different pages after tomorrow....Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:54, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
But yeah I concede I am surprised at how much there is to fix and amazed we didn't settle on which engvar to use....Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:55, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Fair point Casliber, and no hard feelings I hope. It's a nice article, but I happen to believe we should show off our best work and this didn't cut it for me. 2009 is a million years ago in Wikipedia time, and there's probably an argument to be had about whether FAs from x years ago should be on the main page. But let's not have that argument now! Well done for writing the article, and for your openness for its being improved further. --MarchOrDie (talk) 00:30, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks to Sasata and Casliber for their helpful and interesting comments. I wanted to bring up one thing that relates to engvar: the section heading about Christmas uses the term "Santa Claus" rather than "Father Christmas" which is the appropriate British English engvar name for that character. Of course the ref based on Jonathan Ott is a US book. I don't know, perhaps we should mention both names? Invertzoo (talk) 00:34, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I wonder about that...I am finding that Santa Claus seems to be pretty universal now and Father Christmas becoming antiquated (?) Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:56, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Amanita as Origin Point of Human Religion

While hotly debated in the 1970s, this is now the dominant scientific opinion, and this page should reflect that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.240.10.28 (talk) 04:39, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

Please read WP:CITE, WP:RS, WP:NPOV, and WP:FRINGE. Just because a few folks speaking outside of their field are absolutely convinced does not mean that mainstream academia accepts it at all, and Wikipedia sticks with mainstream academia. Ian.thomson (talk) 05:44, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

It is most assuredly a mainstream view amongst educated people, the world over. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.240.10.28 (talk) 02:55, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

That's a No true Scotsman fallacy, not a proper citation of reliable sources. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:04, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Mushroom-shed

Someone in the town of Tiegem, West Vlaanderen has decorated a shed as an amanita mushroom. I have seen it in televised cycling races. You can see it in video at this link: http://www.climbbybike.com/video-climb.asp?MountainID=9410&Climb=Tiegemberg (on the google map, click "Slow" "Route" and "Cycling" The mushroom-hut will appear on the right after a truck is passed. Click "Stop" (the Cycling tab renamed) for a close view. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.253.140.178 (talk) 02:31, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

The shed is on the grounds of Te Lande restaurant-feestzaal (restaurant banquet facilities). The restaurant's web site does not explain the inspiration for the mushroom decoration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.253.129.223 (talk) 17:56, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Identification

  • Is this most likely var. guessowii? If so, it might be worth using in place of the current image. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:56, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Amanita muscaria. 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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:29, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Vikings

This article states that there has been speculation on fly agaric's use as an intoxicant in places such as Scandinavia. It could also point out that there have been claims that the Vikings took it as an intoxicant. Vorbee (talk) 18:43, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Amanita muscaria. 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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:18, 21 September 2017 (UTC)


>> I believe the name "muscaria" in "*Amanita muscaria*" comes from the fact that flies love laying their eggs in this species, eggs who when hatched into maggots will devour the entire mushroom from the inside within two to three days; rather than the folk etymology cited. This is common knowledge to me, however, so I wouldn't know who to cite; but I am sincere and correct so someone may find a citation if he or she looked.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Amanita_muscaria/Archive_2&oldid=863075375"