Talk:Psyllium

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mengyin Zhang.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 07:26, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Author

When I wikified the article i didn't know where/if I should include the author's information, so I removed it. Here it is in case anyone wants to put it back in the article somewhere:

1-C.V. Hanson , 2-E.A. Oelke and D.H. Putnam, 3-E.S. Oplinger

1 Center for Alternative Plant and Animal Products, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108.

2 Department of Agronomy, and Plant Genetics, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108.

3 Department of Agronomy, College of Agricultural and Life Sciences and Cooperative Extension Service, University of Wisconsin- Madison, WI 53706. June 1, 1992.

Cite

This needs a cite (read WP:RS and WP:V first! •Jim62sch• 14:33, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Normally as part of a cleanser, together with a wide spectrum anti-parasitic formula, and a probiotic, ie friendly bacteria for the intestinal system.

Psyllium is twice as effective as regular fiber to cleanse the system and to those who can tolerate it, preferred.

This is rather badly phrased; "Cases of allergic reaction to psyllium containing cereal have been documented." is there any psyllium that contains cereal?

Merge Psyllium seed husks here

Support

I support the merge. --Slashme 05:10, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Also, please point to Isabgol (also Sat-Isabgol or Isapgol),

As long as it re-directs properly then I support. --jadepearl 15:08, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Please merge with Isabgol it is maximum used in India. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.8.136.250 (talk) 03:48, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

They may be topic with different uses for research, but they are closely related. As long as it redirects properly as Jadepearl says, there shouldn't be any difficulties for users. Nmoo (talk) 03:00, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

There CAN be common ground. There can be a mention of it with reference to a full page for Phyllium Husks. Yes, Psyllium is the plant, but the product of the husks is a product of Psyllium. It's like listing hemp, but not mentioning what you can do with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.27.9.20 (talk) 17:20, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I support the value of merging both articles, in that Psyllium husks is just a stub, and is, or should, be part of the flora article; and probably generates more interest in the main Psyllium article than the plant information. I believe both articles merged - under Psyllium (with a redirect for husks) - would be best for information seekers. The emphasis will be on the plant, with applications secondary.This is common amongst most flora with human bio applications.

This is not a product, but a biological, and the new article will be structured accordingly, with no commercial references in the main article. SystemArchitect (talk) 05:38, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Oppose

• Do not merge. One is about a plant and one is about a product. Both article function well as standalone artilces. -- Alan Liefting talk 22:42, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
• Actually, that is a good point. I retract my support for the merge. --Slashme 14:40, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Psyllium is a general topic. Psyllium husk is a more specific topic with a lot of information attached to it. I stand in favour of not merging. EM (Frequent wikipedia user) Dec 22 2007

• Do not merge, the two articles should stay separate, however should the article about the plant be expanded to include its uses. -Jenny Juhl. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.177.19.140 (talk) 21:25, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
• Do not merge, but reduce the size of the "usage" section here in the plant article, and provide a link to the standalone usage article(s). Petershank (talk) 15:45, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

'Cultural' or 'Cultivating'?

Which word is correct for crop planting etc.? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.193.144.79 (talk) 11:40, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and carefull attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 18:09, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Health effects of dietary psyllium section needs cites

The health effects information presented is correct, but the cites are lacking entirely or so vague as to be useless.

There are some more authoritative and specific sources cited in a "Sources" section at the end of the article, rather than footnoted in the text. These would be much more effective if they were footnoted in the text.

The listed "Sources" also lack web URLs, which can be added by consulting PubMed at the NLM NIH.

Allergic reactions to psyllium are documented here: http://www.drugs.com/sfx/psyllium-side-effects.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.171.152.2 (talk) 10:21, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Sources

There are some more authoritative and specific sources cited in a "Sources" section at the end of the article, rather than footnoted in the text. These would be much more effective if they were footnoted in the text.

The listed "Sources" also lack web URLs, which can be added by consulting PubMed at the NLM NIH.

Many additional medical journal sources, some duplicative of "Sources" section

Alberts DS, Martínez ME, Roe DJ, et al. Lack of effect of a high-fiber cereal supplement on the recurrence of colorectal adenomas. N Eng J Med. 2000;342(16):1156-1162.

Anderson JW, Allgood LD, Lawrence A, et al. Cholesterol-lowering effects of psyllium intake adjunctive to diet therapy in men and women with hypercholesterolemia: meta-analysis of 8 controlled trials. Am J Clin Nutr. 2000;71:472-479.

Blumenthal M, Goldberg A, Brinckmann J. Herbal Medicine: Expanded Commission E Monographs. Newton, MA: Integrative Medicine Communications; 2000: 314-321.

Burke V, Hodgson JM, Beilin LJ, Giangiulioi N, Rogers P, Puddey IB. Dietary protein and soluble fiber reduce ambulatory blood pressure in treated hypertensives. Hypertension. 2001;38(4):821-826.

Chan MY, Heng CK. Sequential effects of a high-fiber diet with psyllium husks on the expression levels of hepatic genes and plasma lipids. Nutrition. 2008;24(1):57-66.

Chandalia M, Garg A, Lutjohann D, von Bergmann K, Grundy SM, Brinkley LJ. Beneficial effect of high dietary fiber intake in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. N Eng J Med. 2000; 342:1392-1398.

Chang HY, Kelly EC, Lembo AJ. Current gut-directed therapies for irritable bowel syndrome. Curr Treat Options Gastroenterol. 2006 Jul;9(4):314-23.

Cicero AF, Derosa G, Manca M, Bove M, Borghi C, Gaddi AV. Different effect of psyllium and guar dietary supplementation on blood pressure control in hypertensive overweight patients: a six-month, randomized clinical trial. Clin Exp Hypertens. 2007;29(6):383-94.

Fernandez-Banares F. Nutritional care of the patient with constipation. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol. 2006;20(3):575-87. Review.

Jänne PA, Mayer RJ. Chemoprevention of colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2000;342(26):1960-1968.

Krauss RM, Eckel RH, Howard B, Appel LJ, Daniels SR, Deckelbaum RJ, et al. AHA Scientific Statement: AHA Dietary guidelines Revision 2000: A statement for healthcare professionals from the nutrition committee of the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2000;102(18):2284-2299.

Liu S, Manson JE, Stampfer MJ, et al. A prospective study of whole-grain intake and risk of type-2 diabetes mellitus in women. Am J Pub Health. 2000;90:1409-1415.

National Cholesterol Education Program. Executive summary of the third report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) expert panel on detection, evaluation, and treatment of high blood cholesterol in adults (Adult Treatment Panel III). JAMA. 2001;285(19):2486-2497.

Petchetti L, Frishman WH, Petrillo R, Raju K. Nutriceuticals in cardiovascular disease: psyllium. Cardiol Rev. 2007 May-Jun;15(3):116-22. Review.

Rakel D. Rakel Integrative Medicine, 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Saunders Elsevier; 2007.

Saper RB, Eisenberg DM, Phillips RS. Common dietary supplements for weight loss. Am Fam Physician. 2004 Nov 1;70(9):1731-8. Review.

Schatzkin A, Lanza E, Corle D, et al. Lack of effect of a low-fat, high-fiber diet on the recurrence of colorectal adenomas. N Engl J Med. 2000;342(16):1149-1155.

Shrestha S, Freake HC, McGrane MM, Volek JS, Fernandez ML. A combination of psyllium and plant sterols alters lipoprotein metabolism in hypercholesterolemic subjects by modifying the intravascular processing of lipoproteins and increasing LDL uptake. J Nutr. 2007 May;137(5):1165-70.

Singh B. Psyillium as therapeutic drug delivery agent. Int J Pharm. 2007;334(1-2):1-14.

Theuwissen E, Mensink RP. Water-soluble dietary fibers and cardiovascular disease. Physiol Behav. 2008;94(2):285-92.

Uehleke B, Ortiz M, Stange R. Cholesterol reduction using psyllium husks - do gastrointestinal adverse effects limit compliance? Results of a specific observational study. Phytomedicine. 2008;15(3):153-9.

Ziai SA, Larijani B, Akhoondzadeh S, Fakhrzadeh H, Dastpak A, Bandarian F, et al. Psyllium decreased serum glucose and glycosylated hemoglobin significantly in diabetic outpatients. J Ethnopharmacol. 2005 Nov 14;102(2):202-7. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.165.11.31 (talk) 17:14, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Question Of How Psyllium Husk Works

The article just states that Psyllium husk just adds bulk to stool which is how it becomes a laxative but I remember reading somewhere that it is a bit "scratchy" so it irritates the bowels and that is how it becomes a laxatibe. Does anyone know if there is any truth to this?70.79.55.114 (talk) 07:37, 8 August 2011 (UTC)BeeCier

Scientific source for: how much it swells? 40 times? 20 times?

Of original weight. ee1518 (talk) 09:46, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

It absorbs 2 or 3g of water per g, but the resultant volume is much greater. 69.124.112.205 (talk) 03:59, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

What does this mean ?

"A 1.5% weight/volume ratio of psyllium mucilage".  1.5% of what?  1.5% by weight, or 1.5% by volume  ? (not the same if the densities of the two substances are different).  If a weigh/volume ratio is intended, then the units of weight and volume must be stated - eg 1.5% in terms of kg per m^3 (15g/m^3) or in terms of kg per liter, (15g/l) or whatever....  Meaningless innit

Interactions with Medicines (and other food?)

Interactions of Psyllium 1/2 http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.3109/03639049509070866

Utilizing the AUC values, the % bioavailability of Carbamazepine in presence of the fibres relative to carbamazepine alone was lower and was found to be 55% (Table I ).

2/2 Lithium: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1968148

91.214.167.2 (talk) 14:23, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Neither merge nor not-merge but clean up internwiki mess

This article, I notice, only has equivalent articles in 4 languages: Arabic, Finnish, Japanese and Urdu. The "Psyllium Seed Husks" article has translations into only 5: Dutch, German, Hebrew, Pampanga, and Swedish. This to me is a tip-off that there is a structural problem as psyllium husks are a fairly widely used product worldwide (traditional in some places and a helath product in many) and the plant is widespread around the whole Mediterranean region and South Asia. The corresponding article in Spanish, is to my mind at least structured properly: It is entitled "Plantago Psyllium" and has its taxobox. I am no botanist, but as far as I can tell from following some of the links to source material, the genus Plantago has several subgenera, of which Psyllium is definitely one, and then there is the species level where I'm not clear whether the botanists are reclassifying things at the moment, so it's presently a bit cloudy, or whether it's all settled. Psyllium does seem to appear again lower on the list, unclear to me whether it's 1 or 2 levels down from the subgenus. At least there seems to be clear agreement on Psyllium the subgenus.

Anyway, all to say that the mission of this article in English is unclear: what is it about? If not about the product (psyllium husks), then I would suppose it must be about the plant. And at least one thing that seems to be clear about the plant at the moment is the subgenus. So I would suggest editing it into an article about Psyllium the subgenus with its corresponding taxobox. In this way it could be the translation of its Spanish equivalent, which has 16 translations at the moment, none in English.

I should think this would be a pretty standard way to organize articles about plants and plant products: One article about the plant itself with a taxobox, and perhaps another if warranted about any major products derived from it. The present organization of this page leaves a bit wanting, I believe, and that is why it has so few equivalents in other languages: It is neither here nor there. I think it would be great if an editor with a bit of a biology or botany background and who knows her/his way around Wikidata could massage this article into a subgenus article and fix the links to the corresponding other languages.

What do you think? Stycklyr (talk) 22:40, 13 March 2016 (UTC) Edited for clarity and accuracy Stycklyr (talk) 23:52, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Have merged as a start to the clean up and organization. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:33, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

I've moved changed all the interwiki links to point to the Wikidata item associated with this article. I don't think this article should cover the subgenus or have a taxobox. The only recent phyloegenetic study sampled 28 species in subgenus Psyllium (and if I'm reading the study correctly, the authors are proposing 67 species in subgenus Psyllium, but didn't analyze all of them). Only a few of the species in the subgenus are used for the dietary fiber product. This article should cover the fiber product, with the subgenus covered in a separate article if at all (Wikipedia generally doesn't have articles on subgenera; in most cases there's not much to say about them aside from a list of species).

There's a bit of a mess with Plantago psyllium; it's not a currently accepted species, but sources differ on whether P. afra or P. indica is the correct name (I think it probably should be P. indica, but I don't have access today to the sources I'd need to look at to confirm that). Plantdrew (talk) 17:48, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

Looking into it further now P. afra and P. indica appear to be accepted as distinct species. Plantago psyllium is a rejected name; many sources have the accepted name as P. arenaria, but P. indica has priority and may also be proposed for rejection soon. Plantdrew (talk) 18:27, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Psyllium seed husks

@Stycklyr, Doc James, and Plantdrew: Wouldn't it be better to merge Special:Permalink/751985414 to Plantago ovata? The references that were cited in that article were specifically about the Plantago ovata species as opposed to other members of the Plantago genus to which "psyllium" may refer. Metamucil also appears to refer to psyllium fiber derived from Plantago ovata, per the Metamucil website: Psyllium husk, a natural dietary fiber originating from plantago ovata, has been the source of both soluble and insoluble fiber in Metamucil for 80 years. Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 17:55, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

I just pulled a book (James Duke's Handbook of Medicinal Herbs) off my shelf to see if there were any claims about which species is most prevalent in commerce. While Duke has Plantago ovata in the header for his Psyllium section, he goes on to say, "I doubt that many botanists can tell all the plantain species apart, even in the field with flowers, fruits, and leaves present. I maintain that unvouchered studies on these closely related species are almost meaningless and the medical literature built on a mountain of toothpicks." (full text available here) Basically, the cited studies are calling whatever is was they studied "Plantago ovata" because that's what medical studies always call it (without ever verifying what species of plant they actually have). According to Duke, WHO considers P. afra (=P. psyllium), P. asiatica, P. indica and P. ovata to be sources of psyllium. Plantdrew (talk) 18:10, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Also call the stuff psyllium and I assume that is the generic name. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 22:48, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Well, I suppose the relevant question is, is all plant matter which is called "psyllium" used in the production of dietary fiber products which is consumed by humans? If so, then I agree that those two articles should redirect here. However, if this is not the case, then those two links should redirect to P. ovata OR it should be made clear in this article by creating an independent level 2 subsection on fiber supplements that contain psyllium which states the species that are used in fiber supplements in the introduction to that section. Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 19:10, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

Edit: just to be clear, if the latter is the case and we don't fix this, then we are deliberately misleading our readers. Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 19:12, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

I think all plant matter which is called "psyllium" (lower case, no italics) is used in the production of dietary fiber products, and that this plant matter comes from a handful of species in "Plantago subgenus Psyllium" (including, but not limited to P. ovata). In rare cases (taxonomy contexts) one might see "Psyllium" (capitalized and italicized) referring to the entire subgenus (including species not used as the source for "psyllium"). 22:53, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Agree if there are less common uses of the term than we should definitely have other pages for them and link them here. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:28, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Needs mention of FDA and EFSA approved health claims

For cholesterol lowering, U.S. and European Union have approved health claims. Should be added, with examples of label wording, and appropriate citations. David notMD (talk) 07:20, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Done. Actually, US has an approved claim, but EU (EFSA) never reviewed a proposal, and so no position taken. David notMD (talk) 03:13, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Production statistics

We generally get these from WHO/FAO. I spent some time looking and it doesn't appear that they track this as a commodity. But ideally rather than commercial sources we go to other trade organizations (like the OECD), then to national governments, and finally to independent media. We sometimes use market research reports; almost never do we use sites of companies that actually sell and trade. Jytdog (talk) 01:31, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Good points, but until other sources are revealed, why not put in as a placeholder, "According to a commercial sit, India is the predominant source of psyllium" (with the link). As a psyllium user, I found this commercial site to be useful.Bellagio99 (talk) 17:51, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Better to wait, to find a good source. Jytdog (talk) 03:33, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Brand names

Regarding the medical uses, it is common and helpful on article pages to include the common brand names under which products are sold. I suggest doing so for both Fybogel (used in the UK and elsewhere) and Metamucil (used in the US and elsewhere). This is particularly important given that both these brand names redirect to Psyllium. Note that "inbound redirects" should be mentioned in the first couple of paragraphs of the article or section to which the redirect goes and "it will often be appropriate to bold the redirected term". I have attempted to do this for Fybogel, but having been quickly reversed I've brought it here for discussion. Bellagio99 might have a view. Klbrain (talk) 19:57, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

If you want to put in brand names, makes sense to also adding Metamucil. Not sure it needs a whole section for one sentence

It's not a new section; just entering some text in a currently empty section (the Uses section, which current has no section text, just starts with a level 3 heading. I'll show you what I mean in the article). Klbrain (talk) 13:46, 6 July 2019 (UTC)

"Metamucil" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Metamucil. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 6#Metamucil until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Robert McClenon (talk) 01:18, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Extraneous details about Metamucil

The inclusion and coverage of Metamucil is valid as a major commercial use/trade of psylllium, but the current Metamucil coverage seems way too detailed to the point of irrelevance. Eg, do we need to know the product logo has been updated, and how often? Nvmb3rTh30ry (talk) 01:48, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Agree - deleted. Zefr (talk) 03:06, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

"It increases flatulence (gas) to some degree."

The source for this included statement does not refer specifically to Psyllium, but to fiber in general. In fact, other sources mention that Psyllium is (surprisingly) anti-flatulent. The sentence should be removed.

69.124.112.205 (talk) 03:57, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

What does "behind the counter" brand mean?

I am a native British English speaker and do not know what this phrase means. In British English an "over the counter" medicine is one available from a pharmacist which does not require a prescription from a physician.

I have never heard the phrase '"behind the counter" brand'. I assume it is an American English phrase or a phrase from another culture.

Can someone either provide an explanation for its meaning within the text, or remove it and replace it with text meaning the same thing in English across all native speakers. Lkingscott (talk) 07:21, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

Gently reminding of wp:notaforum, a quick google search brought up the following:

1. https://www.uspharmacist.com/article/behind-the-counter-products-a-third-class-of-drugs

and perhaps more notably from the NHS:

1. https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/medicines-information/

It may have originated in the US, but it has integrated into the UK at least at the NHS level, but fair to say not common vernacular per your query. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 07:51, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

I also see that behind the counter redirects to over the counter drug, but the coverage of the specific term amounts to merely two sentences, regrettably, so not even worth wl'ing to it in this article. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 07:55, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

I've added a simple description of 'behind the counter' to the article body, as coverage of the term is sparse, both here on WP and elsewhere. Hopefully it doesn't fall under 'original research'! If so I'll add the above links as reference. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 20:18, 12 October 2022 (UTC)