Talk:Centella asiatica

Dubious/Uncited claim about "severe health problems" in Composition section

In the Composition section there is an scary warning about how use in the skin could lead to "skin irritation, intoxicated blood, red eyes and problems with the lymph nodes", but this does not seem to be backed by any sources. Moreover, the previous citation [13] indicates in its abstract "Pharmacological studies revealed a wide range of beneficial effects of CA on CNS, cardiovascular, lung, liver, kidney, gastrointestinal, skin, and endocrine system", and some citations included in the "Traditional medicine" section mention several potential benefitial dematological applications. Diegopau (talk) 21:24, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

With Special:Diff/1336451646, I removed that unsourced, exaggerated statement. There are no WP:MEDRS sources to cite in support of the lab research/pharmacology studies or folk medicine practices claiming "beneficial" effects.

The source you mentioned is just conjecture and wishful thinking from lab studies, concluding correctly that "preclinical studies and particularly randomized controlled trials are needed to clarify the therapeutic roles", none of which has been substantiated in mainstream science or adopted by any clinical organization. Zefr (talk) 22:02, 3 February 2026 (UTC)

"Manduk pami" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Manduk pami has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2026 March 13 § Manduk pami until a consensus is reached. ArcticSeeress (talk) 13:01, 13 March 2026 (UTC)