Talk:Uncaria tomentosa

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Uncaria tomentosa is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to plants and botany. For more information, visit the project page.
B	This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

	Complementary and Alternative Medicine Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject on Alternative Medicine. Please visit the project page for more details, or ask questions on talk.
B	This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.

	Latin America Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Central America, which collaborates on articles related to Central America. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.

Uncaria tomentosa has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Contents 1 WLU's wholesale deleations 2 Reliable sources 3 Why I am reverting Mystar's edits 4 removed sentence

[edit] WLU's wholesale deleations

Again WLU you need to stop editing incorrect information! You are placing incorrect information PLEASE stop adding incorrect and improper information Were you to actually do any real research you would see these facts as I have listed are not only cited and factual, but quite informative.

the facts I'm removing and altering are in many cases either direct plagiarism, or redundant, or unclear.22:05, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

You do not own this page, however IF you are going to edit it, you DO have to be accurate. Removal of accurate and factual information is considered vandalism and editing a page to include incorrect information and eliminating corrected information, just because you cannot stand for someone else to edit over you is also considered vandalism. Please cease and desist. I shall refer this for moderation review--Mystar 13:46, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Please refer this for moderation, I look forward to their comments. I have not removed factual information, except for the 'investigated in x, x, x, x, country since the 70's. It has been investigated all over the world, so this info is kinda pointless. I'll put in some better references in my next edit. WLU

Further doing even more research you will note that the word liana, is not referenced or used. Also you have removed pertinent information allowing the reader to have knowledge of the topic and places improperly sources indigenous facts, thus making the article to contain fales and misleading information--Mystar 13:52, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Agree that the current version reads better. --Alex (Talk) 14:30, 6 October 2006 (UTC) - note that Mystar and I have a...contentious...relationship, neither of us really use good faith with each other's edits. See what you think of the article after I've finished with it today. WLU

Liana is now referenced. It's also a technical term, therefore appropriate. See this if you want the term used in reference to the plant. I don't know what indigenous facts means, please define. Also, one line that I changed didn't make sense - "large, woody vine that derives its name from hook-like thorns that grow up to 30m tall climbing by means of hooked thorns along the vine that resemble the claws of a cat" makes it sound like the thorns are 30m tall, and that the vine resembles the claws of a cat. It now makes sense.

I removed the references to all of the countries because 1) it was a direct quotation from the website and therefore plagiarism, and 2) because the plant will not restrict itself to specific countries - ergo general geographic categories make more sense.

I removed the section "also known as Cat's Claw ^[1]" because the article is called Cat's Claw. There does not seem to be a need to reference this fact, I think it is prima facie. Similar for the information about the family Cats Claw falls into - it's in the article already in the side box. I did move the sub-family info to the table - since there is nothing attached to the subfamily, no extra info, I don't think it really needs a whole sentence in the article.

I also added references for the info in the text about what Cat's Claw is used for, and has been experimentally verified for. Right now it's unsourced, which isn't good if people are using the entry for diagnosis or health reasons.

The first sentence in the uses section is way too long, I took out the unnecessary info about where it's researched, since it is now researched all over the world.

Added a review article which is recent. Couldn't fit in the sub-family in the table, if anyone wants to put it back. Seems pretty irrelevant.WLU 22:05, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

We have a consensus; Please do not change what has been considered a better version.

You have one person's opinion besides mine and yours. That person wanted to include a sentence that implied the thorns grew 30m tall (sorry Alex, that's how I read it - your opinion on the new version?). Also, I took out where you inserted the sentence "We have a consensus; Please do not change what has been considered a better version. Your facts are incorrect" into the middle of my paragraph 'cause it screwed up the link which demonstrates the use of the liana term. The link that showed liana is correctly used in conjunction with Cat's ClawWLU

Your facts are incorrect. Liana, may be referenced all you wish, it really has nothing to do with Cat's Claw. Further the simple fact that you do not know what indigenous means is clearly a point to you not being able to properly reference this page. I'm sure if you decided to do some research you would find that the plant’s indigenous aspects are pertinent especially to its history i.e. where it came from. As to your imagined contentious anything, I think you need to pay attention to your facts and less to me. Simply because You edit a page does not mean you own it.--Mystar 23:03, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

I know what indigenous means, the fact that you used it incorrectly in the sentence makes me question your understanding of the term. Do you mean it in the sense of 'native' or in the sense of 'intrinsic'? Did you click on the link where it says "Cat's claw is a large perennial, a woody vine (liana)"? Kinda seems relevant there. WLU

Hi guys, sorry for the wikistalking but I'm very bored today. I don't have any knowledge of botany, so I don't want to get involved in the edits here, but I have to point out that "Uncaria tomentosa (also known as Cat's Claw [1] or Uña de Gato) is a large, woody vine that derives its name from hook-like thorns that grow up to 30m tall climbing by means of hooked thorns along the vine that resemble the claws of a cat." is a very confusing sentence. If you're worried about copying too much directly from the source, how about this: "Uncaria tomentosa (also known as Cat's Claw [1] or Uña de Gato) is a large, woody vine that grows up to 30m tall. It climbs by means of hooked thorns that resemble the claws of a cat." Personally I think the origins of its name are self-evident. If nothing else, change "grow" to "grows" since it's supposed to be modifying "large, woody vine" rather than "hook-like thorns" and put a comma after "tall" to separate the clauses.

Second, in response to WLU, the note "also known as Cat's Claw, should remain in the article because the article's actual title is "Uncaria tomentosa". "Cat's Claw" just redirects to "Uncaria tomentosa". Thus, if the note is removed and someone searches for "Uncaria tomentosa" directly, the name Cat's Claw wouldn't appear anywhere. I hope that made sense. Anyway, good luck hashing this out. -Captain Crawdad 23:50, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Wikistalk all you want, I have no problem with you following me around. I trust your good intentions and your suggestions make sense. If you look at the current version (I don't know which version you were looking at, I think it's the version previous to my last edit), it says Uncaria tomentosa (also known as Cat's Claw or Uña de Gato in Spanish) is a liana (woody vine) that derives its name from hook-like thorns that resemble the claws of a cat. U. tomentosa can grow up to 30m tall, climbing by means of these thorns. The leaves are in opposite pairs or whorls of two with a smooth margin. Cat's claw is indigenous to the Amazon rainforest and other tropical areas of South and Central America. Also, I'm not objecting to the inclusion of the term 'Cat's Claw', I'm objecting to the link that follows it - I think it can be taken on faith that U. tomentosa is Cat's Claw, I don't think we need a link to prove it. That's like having a link to say Terry Goodkind wrote the fantasy novel Wizard's First Rule(link), Blood in the Fold(link), and is an author(link). The version in bold still has the term Cat's Claw in it. WLU

I'm all about compramise CD! Nicely worded :) As for Wikistalking...lol... I think you will find it is WLU who stated flatly she was stalking my contribs as a means of checking up on me...I've got the link to prove it.;p But I digress! I've more important things to do that argue with a person who cannot edit, but rather own's a page. I think I've made my point. I'll allow the Admins to handle it.

One thing I woudl like to point out is acting in good faith, on e woudl simply add the quotation marks if one saw that they were forgotten, rather than wholesale deleate the whole set of information. When someone does that is indeed shows the bad faith actions form the one--Mystar 03:15, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand the point you are trying to make. I'm sure you'll imply that I'm stupid for this, but at least explain yourself more clearly so I can rebut. WLU 12:09, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reliable sources

1. Referenced article on Cat's Claw
2. Summary article on uses of Cat's Claw
3. a b c Heitzman, M.E., Neto, C.C., Winiarz, E., Vaisberg, A.J. & Hammon, G.B. (2005). Ethnobotany, phytochemistry and pharmacology of Uncaria (Rubiaceae). Phytochemistry, 66(1), 5-29. PMID 15649507
4. NutraSanus article on Cat's Claw

Only Reference no 3 above appears to be a reliable source.

• "The Ashánika are considered the most knowledgeable of this herb,[1] and consider the herb sacred.[2]" Please see WP:AWW.
• "Other possible uses include the treatment of AIDS in combination with AZT, the treatment and prevention of arthritis and rheumatism, diabetes, PMS, chronic fatigue syndrome, lupus, and prostrate conditions.[4]" Unless there are PMID studies to back these statements, they shouldn't be inserted based on website claims. Peer review is not the right place for content disputes: see WP:RFC. Sandy 00:17, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

I've altered the article to show that it's from a manufacturer, does it read better now? I'm relatively new at editing articles of this sort so I'm not sure about the standards. I'm quite happy to take the whole sentence on the Ashanika. WLU 14:27, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Nice work Sandy, I like what you added and reformatted. While I am still a new user and make mistakes (peer review), I do so in the attempt to stop WLU's ownership of this and several pages. You will find no matter what you place, she will not allow it to stand, or alter it (as you have just seen) to only what she wants it to say. I have a great deal of knowledge in the herbal remedies arena and Cat's Claw has been a particular life save in my life. Contrary to WLU's statement, I have in great detail researched what information I place. All one has to do is to read the info, and the references I placed. But, as we know with WLU's (she even makes this statement) she cannot be trusted to convey truthfully. I appreciate your input and insight. I'm also sure that now that I've outed WLU's ownership tendencies, she will also back off because people will be looking at that aspect. Every page she works on she will only allow her content to stand. Sad that...--Mystar 20:01, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

WLU I truly wish you would stop adding incorrect information. You are going to kill someone. Lupus and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE), are very different things and treatment is very different. The article states "Cat's claw has been called one of the most important botanical herbs found in the rain forest and is used as a cleansing and supportive herb of the immune system, cardiovascular system, and intestinal system. Although research on cat's claw began in the 1970s, it didn't gain worldwide attention until the 1990s, when studies showed it to be a possible treatment for Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) and Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) infection; cancer; and other ailments. Cat's claw is reported to enhance immunity and heal digestive and intestinal disorders. It has been used to treat many other ailments including acne, allergies, arthritis, asthma, candidiasis, chronic fatigue, chronic inflammation, depression, diabetes mellitus, environmental toxicity and poisoning, Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), fibromyalgia, hemorrhoids, herpes, hypoglycemia, systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE)" NOT Lupus erythematosus. As I said. the two are different. I've watched my daughter suffer with SLE for years and finally DIE at age 18 from this syndrom. I know what is and is not used to treat and the differances... So dudette get a grip and stop causing truble already. You are causing confusion by placing the impropper information...which doesn't surprise me considering your past edits. If I've sid it once I've said it many times STOP OWNING PAGES. You are not the expert nor are your adding correct information. You are obfuscating the page with needless fluf. Stop already Mystar 01:33, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

How is lupus different from SLE? Of the five types of lupus I found on the redirect page, only SLE seems to be referred to as just lupus. Is there a sixth type that has not made it onto Wikipedia? Perhaps you could create that article then. Are you referring to Discoid LE? If you are referring to a type of lupus not referenced on wikipedia (see this page) Because as I read it, the article you are quoting, what you are using to support your argument, states that CC has been used to treat SLE, which as far as I can tell is not different from LE. Currently SLE redirects to LE, suggesting, on Wikipedia anyway, that they are the same thing. Please, inform me how SLE is different from LE, using specific references because I'm inclined to believe the referenced Wikipedia article more than your word. If you are so concerned about my capacity to cause death and mayhem (which I've altered my user page to reflect by the way, so hopefully the public is protected) perhaps you might consider leaving in the reference which states that Cat's Claw was implicated in a death at one point. Seems kinda important, so much so that readers might consult a professional rather than just using a publically editable on-line encyclopaedia for their diagnosis and treatment. I would hardly consider that fluff.

Incidentally, your one instance of experience with SLE diagnosis and treatment may not be representative, which is why I am using scholarly articles and referenced websites to add information (hence the inclusion of SLE within the article, 'cause I've got specific references which state that CC has been used to treat it - it does not say successfully, but it does say was used). Modifying a wikipage according to single instances of experience is very contrary to the scientific process (which uses massed testing to control for individual variations) and should not be reflected on Wikipedia. I found that broccoli gives me nasty burps, but I don't put it up on the broccoli page because I've never seen it refered to as doing so in anyone else. Were I actually owning pages, I would modify every single one of them to reflect what I think.

Honestly, is this a joke? Are you kidding?

Also, I am of the male gender. Should you keep referring to me as female, I can only assume that it's to annoy me. Allow me to state that it does annoy me, so any further use is deliberate, and violates WP:Civil, as does you calling the information I'm adding useless fluff. If you've got any further problems with my edits, take it up with mediation or arbitration. I mean, what are you afraid of? Report me, try to get me kicked off. I'll totally go toe to toe on this one. WLU 14:03, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why I am reverting Mystar's edits

Here's a point-by-point summary of why I'm reverting Mystar's edits. Please reply.

• Uncaria tomentosa Cat's Claw or Uña de Gato)

You don't need a reference saying that this is cat's claw, and the external link here looks messy. I've removed it, and placed the weblink in the references. Since the information is contained in the references, where individuals can refer to it, there is no need for a specific reference within the text, especially on such a basic point.

• is an liana,

It should be 'a', not 'an'

• There are two types of Cat's Claw, Unicaria tomentosa and Unicaria guianensis; the two are frequently confused but generally U. tomentosa is the species used medicinally.

The original reference that you removed discussed the differences between the two at length. The chemotypes which you again removed provided a discussion of the chemical properties of the plant, and how different chemotypes can be physically identical but have different chemical make-ups. There's a wikilink for a definition. It seems important to me. Why did you take it out?

Also, both the references you removed from the first paragrpah are paper references. Go to your local university and look up Phytomedicine and Journal of Ethnopharmacology, or check out both on google scholar. I'll be replacing the Ethno one with an on-line PDF link, as it is more accessible. As for the Phytonmedicine link, it is not "non-working", it is a perfectly acceptable peer-reviewed publication which is accessible either on-line through a library account at a university or by physically visiting a library with peer-reviewed journals. I happened to read the on-line version that I have access to. If you look up the title of the Phytomedicine article on google scholar, you can get an abstract of the complete article.

• it is native to Central and South America, Also occurring in tropical rainforests from Guatemala south to Peru nomally

Guatemala is in Central America, forming the norther boundary, Peru is in South America, and the vine will not limit itself to political boundaries, as I have stated before. Since it says that it is limited to tropical areas, there is no need for political boundaries, unless you wanted to indicate that Peru is the southern boundary of the tropical areas of South America. I don't know if that fact is true, but I think, given the notation of 'limited to tropical areas', the countries are not needed. Tropical means bounded roughly by the tropics of Cancer and Capricorn to the north and south, eliminating the need for political boundaries for limits to habitat.

The external links you embedded in the text look messy, hence I use the references, which puts them all at the bottom of the page where they are still accessible. I kept the first line as "deriving its name from hook-like thorns that resemble the claws of a cat" because it makes more sense to have the reason for the name come before the description of the leaves. I'll leave in the sub-family reference since you seem attached to it, and there's no real reason to remove it (nor is there much of a reason to have it, but in the interest of compromise...) but I'm taking out the mention of the family 'cause it is in the taxobox.

If you have any further changes to the first paragraph, please discuss them, providing reasons for your edits.

Also, your change of "systemic lupus erythematosus" to "Lupus SLE" is kinda weird, 'cause Lupus SLE is systemic lupus erythematosus. Why are you duplicating the term? Alternatively, what's the difference between the two?

WLU 18:33, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Noting Lupus-SLE is important as it is ment to define the differance between type. Those of us who deal with this specific type look for pertinate info as to type and sevearity. SLE, being notes as such. The referance material also denotes Lupus-SLE and therefore it should be included. Mystar 19:06, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

But it's already Systemic Lupus Erythematosus! Why is it now "systemic lupus erythematosus (Lupus-SLE)"? Is there a difference between systemic lupus erythematosus and Lupus-SLE is? What is the difference between the two? Is Lupus-SLE actually called "Lupus-systemic lupus erythematosus", which is different from plain old systemic lupus erythematosus? You are confusing quoting sources with referencing sources. If the source says Lupus-SLE, but that is the same thing as systemic lupus erythematosus, why have systemic lupus erythematosus followed immediately by Lupus-SLE? If it just said lupus but actually meant discoid lupus, then it would be important, but I'd put in "discoid lupus erythematosus" instead of just lupus. You use a reference, you don't slavishly quote it. If systemic lupus erythematosus is the same thing as SLE or Lupus-SLE, why the duplication? WLU 19:23, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] removed sentence

I removed the sentence "Care and consultation with your physician should be taken when taking this or any type of remedies." for two reasons. First, it should not be presented in the voice it is, i.e. using the word 'your'. Second, wikipedia is not a place to be turning to for advice - see this section of WP:NOT, particularly point 4 - "...Wikipedia articles should not include instructions or advice (legal, medical, or otherwise)..." I think the inclusion of the allergic reaction is sufficient. Again, there is a disclaimer at the bottom of every single page, so we're obligated to include encyclopaedic knowledge, not warnings or instructions. WLU 02:33, 14 December 2006 (UTC)