Talk:Hyperforin

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Hyperforin.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

Chemicals Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.ChemicalsWikipedia:WikiProject ChemicalsTemplate:WikiProject Chemicalschemicals articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Pharmacology

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Hypericaceae: Plants Mid‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Hypericaceae, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the plant family Hypericaceae and related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.HypericaceaeWikipedia:WikiProject HypericaceaeTemplate:WikiProject HypericaceaeHypericaceae articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Plants (assessed as Low-importance).

What's the difference between hyperforin and Octahydrohyperforin?

Right now the molecules look identical. 91.158.185.124 (talk) 02:36, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, also tetrahydrohyperforin. They are identical depictions, so are certainly not different names. Suggest removing them from the table, or creating the correct models. 2605:A000:140A:42A7:3C4F:CE83:510F:C826 (talk) 23:14, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Has it been shown to inhibit UPTAKE or REUPTAKE? These are distinctly different, and I would assume that uptake inhibition of most of the NT's mentioned would make one MORE depressed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.173.158.4 (talk) 05:28, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MAOI or reuptake inhibitor

Can the part about it supposedly being an MAOI citing a resource from 1999 be removed, new evidence shows it is almost certainly an reuptake inhibitor, later stated in the page; the whole thing is contradictory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.151.88.144 (talk) 16:43, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Any sources for the neurotransmitter IC50 chart at the bottom of the page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.206.84.188 (talk) 19:19, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hyperforin. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140221151528/http://mmsl.cz/viCMS/soubory/pdf/IN_PRESS_18102013_Imreova.pdf to http://mmsl.cz/viCMS/soubory/pdf/IN_PRESS_18102013_Imreova.pdf

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) 09:09, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Recent cleanup considered overzealous

User:Zefr did some cleanup in this diff but I think it went a bit too far. The article no longer mentions the believed primary MOA (binding to and activating TRPC6) and the biochemistry/pharmacology section is now barren. The lead was also changed to "there is little evidence that hyperforin and St. John's wort have any effect on depression" which is blatantly false (see this 2016 meta analysis). Frankly I feel like reverting many of the deletions.

Could I get some feedback, perhaps from User:Medgirl131 and User:Jytdog?

— Erik.Bjareholt (talk) 08:43, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I readded slightly rephrased versions of the (hopefully non-controversial) stuff in this diff. – Erik.Bjareholt (talk) 09:07, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted as outdated primary research. Left a note on Erik's talk page. --Zefr (talk) 16:46, 12 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's fair I guess, although I still think it's a shame the scope of Wikipedia is limited in this fashion, since I know no other Wiki for stuff like this. Thanks for adding the new section, greatly appreciated. --Erik.Bjareholt (talk) 06:19, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The chapter on pharmacodynamics is unclear

The text seems to say the opposite of what the table shows or maybe I don't know how it works, usually in articles that talk about inhibitory drugs like SSRIs the Ki value is used in the table and the lower the value the greater the inhibition instead in this case we are talking about IC50 so I suppose that the higher value means higher inhibition.--Unvers (talk) 10:18, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]