Talk:Lutein

In Diet Values

The values in the In Diet section seem not toe match the reference given. In particular, the reference indicates more is in spinach than kale. ~2026-13482-99 (talk) 15:38, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

The table in that section was confusing for the reference amount used (US cup vs 100 g, which varies according to composition and moisture state). I removed the table and replaced it with text and a few food examples, in Special:Diff/ 1341378019, which references the USDA FoodData Central function for "Component search", giving 10,683 food items here.

If there's a better way to discuss food content of lutein (always measured with zeaxanthin), we should discuss it here. Zefr (talk) 22:36, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Good choices. Tables are great - if they're consistent, and updated where appropriate. The number of cites leading up to that table was head-scratching. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is. 02:08, 3 March 2026 (UTC)

I’m not seeing a table anymore, and I, like anastrophe, think having a table is useful, along with a link to the USDA database.

Can we put the table back with correct values? ~2026-15899-26 (talk) 15:24, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

The lutein/zeaxanthin compound is not a defined nutrient, having unknown functions in vivo, and its content can be discussed in the food section for various dark green leaf vegetables or spices using this ranking, if it helped to inform readers. What information is there to feature, and what purpose does a table serve? Zefr (talk) 15:38, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

I agree that the values can be checked in that ranking, and it definitely doesn’t make sense to recreate all of that information in the article. After all, Wikipedia is not meant to be the internet.

From my perspective, having a table for dietary sources is conventional, as for Vitamin C, and it’s something that readers would want here and find useful, just as it had been before when I was cursorily looking for information. ~2026-16626-41 (talk) 15:37, 16 March 2026 (UTC)