Talk:Carapichea ipecacuanha

How thick is a goose quill?

This article says:

The part of ipecacuanha used in medicine is the root, which is simple or divided into a few branches, flexuous, about as thick as a goose quill, and is composed of rings of various size, somewhat fleshy when fresh, and appearing as if closely strung on a central woody cord.

Are readers expected to know how thick a goose quill is? That seems highly unlikely, and the linked Quill article is no help. A more widely understood measure than "thick as a goose quill" should be used here. Millimeters, anyone?--Jim10701 (talk) 22:53, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Helvetius' age

"In 1680, a Parisian merchant named Garnier possessed some 68 kilograms (150 pounds) of the substance and informed the physician Jean Claude Adrien Helvetius (1685–1755) of its power in the treatment of dysentery.[citation needed] Helvetius was granted sole right to vend the remedy by Louis XIV, but sold the secret to the French government, who made the formula public in 1688.[citation needed]" So this formula was made public when Helvetius was three years old? Khemehekis (talk) 19:11, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Other places and uses

Cephaelis ipecacuanha is identified in an American WWII prisoner of war account as being found in the jungle in Burma near the Death Railway and used to treat dysentery among the P.O.W.'s. ISBN-10: 1790223822 ISBN-13: 978-1790223824 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starhistory22 (talk • contribs) 19:51, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

This isn't comprehensible English

A section now reads: "The root of ipecacuanha has been used in preparation of the medicament, the syrup, is simple or divided into a few branches, flexuous, and composed of rings of various size". What this actually says, sort of, is that the syrup of ipecac is simple and divided into rings, etc. What I think it means to say is "the root of ipecacuanha has been used in the preparation of medicines, such as syrup of ipecac; the root is simple, dividing into a few branches, composed of flexible material and rings(?) of various size". That would at least be grammatically correct and feasible, although I still have no idea how a root can be composed of "rings". What's even more mysterious is that I see in the quoted comment below that this same section was previously written in perfectly legible and understandable English, except for the fact that it gave the dimensions of the root only as "as thick as a goose quill" (about pencil width, maybe 5mm, if memory serves). Why someone "improved" this by substituting the whole thing for unreadable English I don't know, since all they had to do was give the size of a goose quill (or the root) in metric units.

64.223.120.244 (talk) 03:51, 31 March 2019 (UTC)