Talk:Agmatine

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 07:51, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits by Gad M. Gilad, Ph.D. (May-June 2014)

I notice a series of edits to this article by Dr. Gad M. Gilad that substantially changed the presentation and content of the article. Dr. Gilad is, no doubt, an authority on the subject; but he holds several patents, and is also the CEO of a company that markets agmatine as a dietary supplement.

I have not reviewed the changes made, and am not making any statement to the effect that Dr. Gilad is untrustworthy. However, given his material stakes in this, I am asking for others to check the diffs and citations to be sure that the article's integrity is preserved. In particular, be on the lookout for the removal of "negative" results (e.g. papers whose conclusions question agmatine's safety) or any rewording-to-disarm.

Again, I have not reviewed the changes. This kind of review is simply warranted whenever a party with financial interest in a substance edits an article about that substance. νημινυλι (talk) 00:16, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Briefly scanning the article, my impression is that these are good-faith edits. I think they still deserve review by some experienced editors, given the circumstances I mentioned above. νημινυλι (talk) 00:29, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Red flag: under the heading "Utility as a nutraceutical," notice the sentence (sans citation) "However, the sulfate salt of agmatine is now available as a safe and effective nutraceutical for neuropathic pain." This sort of statement is why I am on the alert. Dr. Gilad sells this product, so I am not sure the broad phrase "safe and effective" should be allowed here without some kind of citation. νημινυλι (talk) 00:40, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Since the statement in question was tagged with citation needed for a month, and in light of the above, I have removed it. νημινυλι (talk) 19:33, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We need secondary sources

Thus will trim the primary ones. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 03:07, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

♠ To serve as a caveat (and perhaps also as an inspiration) to editors of this article, I want to suggest this brief essay on citing academic sources. At a glance I can see there are still a number of statements in this article backed only by primary sources. νημινυλι (talk) 04:57, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion by User:Gmgilad

There are a few issues. One is that the refs need to be formatted properly per WP:MEDHOW to make it easier for others to verify. Additionally it is unclear which ref supports much of the research section. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 05:59, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Agmatine - Suggested new revision (09-03-2014) Gad M. Gilad

Dear James, Please check this new revision. Gmgilad (talk) 23:17, 3 September 2014 (UTC)Gad Gmgilad (talk) 23:32, 3 September 2014 (UTC)Gad[reply]

It is unclear which ref supports most of the research section. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 07:26, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear James, Below is the full current version. Let me know if it is okay. 108.185.129.48 (talk) 00:20, 3 October 2014 (UTC)Gad[reply]

No it is not okay. I cannot follow what you are getting at. There is no need to repeat it all here. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 02:43, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear James,

I somehow missed your last response. I must tell you though that your answer relating to my last version as posted on the talk page is unclear.

You are stating that the version is somehow unclear, that the citation are somehow not supporting the content and that you cannot follow what I am getting at. Yet you neither indicate why it is unclear, nor why you cannot follow it.

Several colleagues who have read it by now, have indicated that this version is clear and accurate, adequately referenced and unbiased.

At this point your objection is entirely unexplained. Leaving the misleading and substandard Wikipedia entry on Agmatine as is, is entirely your responsibility!

Best… Gmgilad (talk) 04:36, 11 November 2014 (UTC)Gad[reply]


11/18/2014 Version: Gmgilad (talk) 02:09, 19 November 2014 (UTC)Gad M. Gilad[reply]

Ref 2 does not appear to work. As a number of refs not properly formatted. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:13, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Translational Research

Based on laboratory studies using in vitro and in vivo models, the following potential therapeutic applications for agmatine have been suggested:

  • Cardiovascular - Agmatine produces mild reductions in heart rate and blood pressure, apparently by activating both central and peripheral control systems via modulation of several of its molecular targets including: imidazoline receptors subtypes, norepinephrine release and NO production, [1] which may afford cardioprotective effects.[2]
  • Regulation of Glucose Metabolism - Agmatine hypoglycemic effects, known since the 1920s, are the result of simultaneous modulation of several molecular mechanisms involved in blood glucose regulation.[2]
  • kidney Functions - Agmatine has been shown to enhance glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and to exert nephroprotective effects.[2]
  • Neuroprotection -
    • Stroke and Neurotrauma - Post-traumatic treatment with exogenous agmatine exerts neuroprotective effects in various models of ischemia (stroke) and brain and spinal cord injuries.[2]
    • Glaucoma - Topical applications of agmatine to hypertensive rat eyes (a glaucoma model) can significantly lower intraocular pressure and reduce retinal ganglion cell loss.[2]
    • Epilepsy - Agmatine has also shown to exert anti-seizure effects in pre-clinical models.[3]
    • Neurodegeneration (Parkinson’s disease) - Some evidence suggests that agmatine treatment can produce neuroprotective/neuro-rescue effects in animal models of Parkinson’s disease models.[2]
  • Neuropathic Pain - Agmatine also shows capacity for reducing pain-associated behaviors in rodent models of neuropathic pain, apparently by modulating several molecular targets including neurotransmitter receptors, NO signaling and ion channels.[2]
  • Opioid liability - Systemic agmatine can potentiate opioid analgesia and prevent tolerance to chronic morphine. Agmatine treatment can also inhibit opioid dependence and relapse in several animal species. Yet, by itself agmatine does not produce addictive behavior.[2]
  • Behavioral effects -
    • Antidepressant properties - Agmatine administrations dose-responsively produce antidepressant-like behaviors in laboratory animals, which probably involve modulation of several neurotransmitter receptors (including: NMDAr, α2-adrenoceptors, serotonin, δ- and μ-opioid, and imidazoline receptors).[2]
    • Anxiolytic properties - In animal models of anxiety, endogenous brain agmatine metabolism is increased and agmatine treatment exerts significant anxiolytic-like behaviors involving several neurotransmitter receptors.[2]
    • Schizophrenia - Agmatine can attenuate characteristic behavioral patterns and potentiate the inhibitory effect of known antipsychotics in animal models of schizophrenia.[2]
  • Cognitive Effects - Endogenous brain agmatine concentrations correlate positively with the degree of learning and memory capacity and agmatine treatment has been found to improve performance of animals in learning and memory paradigms.[2]
  • Cell Proliferation - Agmatine exerts differential effects on proliferation of various cell types. While agmatine can enhance proliferation of thymocytes, lymphocytes, endothelial cells and neuronal stem cells, it inhibits proliferation of vascular smooth muscle cells, macrophages, astrocytes, fibroblasts and tumor cells, but it is not cytotoxic.[4]

Human Clinical Studies

Thus far, reports of clinical studies are scarce. These were recently reviewed by Piletz et al.[2] as follows:

  • Neuropathy - Oral agmatine, given as agmatine sulfate nutraceutical, has proved to be safe and effective (phase-I and phase-II studies) for pain relief and improved health-related quality of life in lumbar disc-associated radiculopathy (sciatica).
  • Depression - Antidepressant effects of oral agmatine sulfate were observed in one case study. Another study found reduced endogenous agmatine plasma concentrations in depressed patients.
  1. ^ Raasch, W; Schäfer, U; Chun, J; Dominiak, P (2001 Jul). "Biological significance of agmatine, an endogenous ligand at imidazoline binding sites". British journal of pharmacology. 133 (6): 755–80. PMID 11454649. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Text "10.1038/sj.bjp.0704153" ignored (help); Text "DOI" ignored (help)
  2. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m Cite error: The named reference Piletz et al., 2013 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  3. ^ Moretti M, Matheus FC, de Oliveira PA, Neis VB, Ben J, Walz R, Rodrigues ALS, Prediger RD. Role of agmatine in neurodegenerative diseases and epilepsy. Frontiers in Bioscience E6:341-359, 2014. [1]
  4. ^ Molderings GJ, Haenisch B. Agmatine (decarboxylated L-arginine): physiological role and therapeutic potential. Pharmacology and Therapeutics 133:351-365, 2012. doi:10.1016/j.pharmthera.2011.12.005

Misuse of article for promotion

We're witnessing a misuse of Wikipedia to promote a commercial venture by an editor with a huge COI. There is massive violation of MEDRS, so this must stop. See interview with Gad Gilad.

Doc James has done an admirable job in cleaning up this mess. -- Brangifer (talk) 04:24, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks BullRangifer. Extra eyes appreciated. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:34, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are not "witnessing a misuse of Wikipedia to promote a commercial venture by an editor with a huge COI." You are wrong and are usin a misleading referece. According to you, both of you, any persons with commercial interest cannot participate in Wikipedia editing. This is loughable. Conflict of interest as you present it, has nothing to do with the issue at hand. Also see my response to Dr. James's correspondence below. Gmgilad (talk) 05:40, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. James, 1. I am not using Wikipedia for self promotion as your friend implies! 2. As I have indicated several times before, I am very concerned – as a scientist who devoted over 20 years to research agmatine effects and mechanisms of action - that the Agmatine entry in Wikipedia is bellow standard, incorrect and misleading. 3. I confess of not being versed in the rules of Wikipedia editing, but my version as is, is up to standards, accurate and adequately referenced. It is also unbiased and to infer otherwise is unfair! 4. I have read the links you sent. Wikipedia does not work by iron rules (this is one of its great advantages). Once the entry will be edited, references won't be left missing 5. At this point your objections are apparently entirely excessive. You may on the other hand, help by editing/styling the entry accordingly. 6. As I indicated before, leaving the misleading and substandard Wikipedia entry on Agmatine as is, is entirely your responsibility! 7. At this point, therefore, it is entirely in your hands. Sincerely, Gmgilad (talk) 05:40, 19 November 2014 (UTC)Gad[reply]

At the top of this page you'll see some colored boxes of information. The bottom one pertains to you. Please read the pages linked there and then come back here, but not before then. There is a lot you need to learn about how we do things. This isn't your personal website. We edit collaboratively, and you don't get to just write a new article which suits your purposes. So, read those links and I think you'll come back with a better understanding of what we mean by COI. (It basically means that you should avoid editing the article, and only comment on this talk page, with few exceptions.) -- Brangifer (talk) 05:56, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. James,

True, my company sells products which contain agmatine based on our discovery and I never tried to conceal this fact! It is not as if you caught someone red-handed. Yet my company does not sell agmatine per se and I did not write about something the company sells. My entry came to correct a poor version of the subject and is not aiming "to promote a commercial venture". And yes, persons who work in drug companies, including Pfizer, do write entries concerning their company's drugs, directly or indirectly. Wikipedia is full with such entries.

At this point, the whole episode appears as one big charade and does not worth anymore of my precious time. If you really care about the value of entries in Wikipedia, perhaps you should ask someone, who you consider as conforming to your COI policy, to write the Agmatine project (after all, you have it now basically written anyway).

This is indeed, disappointing…

Sincerely, Gmgilad (talk) 23:54, 19 November 2014 (UTC)Gad M. Gilad, Ph.D.[reply]

to whom it may concern,

i had been a researcher in this field for several years. i have read through the wikipedia page on agmatine and find it factually correct and referenced. i do not have any financial interests in agmatine. from my reading the only somewhat suggestive language to promote agmatine as a therapeutic is the 'magic shotgun' statement, but that is what we were looking for at the time in our research / experiments. although i believe it a correct statement, as noted in the review paper, perhaps elimination of that half sentence would remove any potential COI for the reader. [note: i have since removed this half sentence including the term 'magic shotgun' from the agmatine page]

disclosure: during my research years on this topic dr. gilad and i were competitors in describing the generation of agmatine via arginine decarboxylase (ADC) in mammals, and the biological effects of agmatine. my main direction was more towards nitric oxide regulation and also polyamine regulation and growth (i.e., cancer). i gained tremendous respect for dr. gilad's work and was a co-author with him on a recent agmatine review article (cited in references). all authors of that review article were responsible for their separate topics with final editing performed by dr. piletz, and agreed upon by all authors. the wikipedia page was in large part a condensed form of this review article and not the singular opinion of dr. gilad.

sincerely, joseph satriano 76.167.133.73 (talk) 20:05, 19 February 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jsatriano (talk • contribs) 04:02, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ref

"Agmatine is a natural substance that our bodies produce everyday, but if you are a weight trainer, you may want to consume 1.5g of agmatine 30 minutes prior to the exercise in order to effectively gain strong and high­quality muscles.[1] Many researchers claim that agmatine’s cellulotoxic is very low and therefore has no side effects; however, some people who consume agmatine show negative side effects, including diarrhea and vomit.[2]"

First source is not suitable. No idea what the second source is. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 20:10, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Choueiri, Richard. "Best Bodybuilding Pre-Workout Supplements."About.com Sports. N.p., 10 Mar. 2015. Web. 03 Mar. 2016.
  2. ^ 우수. "[혈관확장] 아그마틴(Agmatine)." Monsterzym. Monsterzym, 30 Oct. 2013. Web. 2 Mar. 2016.

agmatine enzymes biosynthesis

looks like there is debate how exactly agmatine is made in the body. genes /enzymes involved are arginine decarboxylase (ADC), AZIN1, AZIN2, OAZ1. OMIM has data on all of them and links to the studies. I looked through them but not completely sure what is going on. It would be good to have a section on its bio synthesis if someone knows enough about it to write a section on it. I don't. Meel11223 (talk) 22:14, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

oops not sure why those 2 sources are below. I thought I clicked new section Meel11223 (talk) 22:15, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Serotonin Receptor Effects

I can't find any studies which claim Agmatine directly affects the serotonin receptors. Should the article be amended to clarify this, or is there something I'm missing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.207.94.80 (talk) 01:43, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Agmatine"