Talk:Fenugreek

Exaggerated health claims

The health claims make fenugreek look like magic potion. I don't have the time to track down the references but this page reads like a pamphlet in a naturopath's office. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.237.182.219 (talk) 03:06, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

The author cites references. Please refute them authoritatively or withdraw your objection.Enstardavid (talk) 15:26, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm new to Wikipedia, so I don't feel comfortable making an edit, but as far as the "900%" increase in breast milk production - the citation points to a dead link. The only relevant line on the breasfeeding.org site that it points to is this- "Options are herbal galactogogues such as fenugreek (no controlled studies but generally recognized as safe)..." The previous commenter is correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.14.103.108 (talk) 00:56, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

I review the citation to back up the claims of increased libido and to be honest I am not impressed... 2 of the references point toward newspaper article with 0 scitific values, 1 link points toward a studies that made the claim: a study of such poor quality should not even been considered in Wikipedia. And the last link points towards a reviews of studies about type 2 diabetes (the author of this paper also noted the very poor quality of all the studies on the matter)

It's not a magic potion. See the recent https://www.sci.news/medicine/trigonelline-cognitive-function-12296.html, original paper https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11357-023-00919-x — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.46.21.155 (talk) 15:17, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

I'm not an expert here, and it's clear you guys have been at this for a while, but the claim "there is no clinical evidence that fenugreek has therapeutic properties." is not reflected in the citation https://www.drugs.com/npp/fenugreek.html

What it actually says is Limited clinical trial data suggest fenugreek extracts may have a role in the therapy of dyslipidemia, diabetes, and Parkinson disease; however, studies were limited and provided inconsistent dosing information, making it difficult to provide recommendations. Anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and cytotoxic properties have yet to be fully explored.

Clearly more research has been done since 2020 when that webpage was originally cited and it is no longer true to say there is no evidence. At the very least the citation needs to be removed since it does not support the claim being cited.

The key word in the the Drugs.com quote is "limited", meaning - as that source and others cited in the Research section say - the quality and amount of clinical research have been absent from the literature due to various design errors in the trials. For Wikipedia, this means there are no WP:MEDRS sources to say anything about a "clinical" (meaning in use and recommended by reputable physicians and clinical organizations) or therapeutic effect. Updates and revisions here. Zefr (talk) 00:01, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Thankyou for your attention on this matter, and your revisions have certainly improved the article. However it does still seem to reflect outdated sources and not the current versions of the citations. There is safe dosing information, both nih.gov and drugs.com say it's safe in amounts commonly used in foods, and drugs.com claims doses of up to 350mg/kg/day (several times higher than the recommended dose on commercial fenugreek supplements, 3,000-6,000mg per day) are safe. The wikipedia pages seems to be inferring from the sources that fenugreek is snake oil with no real benefit, which does seem to have been reflected in the old sources, however the revised sources strongly imply that fenugreek is safe, non-toxic at normal doses, and may have benefits that haven't been fully explored. In this sense the tone of the wikipedia article stands in contrast to the websites it's citing. Reading through the guidelines on medical citations you provided, it seems to me that the wikipedia article should not adopt such a tone if the sources themselves do not justify it.

To wit - fenugreek used to be considered hokum, but upon further study it appears that there may be some truth to it's claims after all.

Whether to cite a weak review

This edit concerning this 2022 review is highlighted as a concern because the review's authors plainly explain the extensive weaknesses of studies included, such as by concluding "the low quality of the included papers, the vast amount of heterogeneity in the data, and research involving patients with various metabolic conditions; extrapolating of our findings to the general population should be with caution." In the review under 3.1. Systematic review and study characteristics, the authors explain the high degree of variability in studies included, all of which were observational in design, i.e., in the category of low-quality evidence, according to WP:MEDASSESS.

Studies like this are of dubious value in writing for the encyclopedia - I recommend we not include it. Until we have higher quality research to report, the last paragraph of the research section adequately explains the weak state of science and absence of effect by fenugreek on human health. Zefr (talk) 02:04, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Hypoglycemia Risk - Mechanism?

Source 4 specifies: "Several coumarin compounds have been identified in fenugreek seeds, as well as a number of alkaloids (eg, trigonelline, gentianine, carpaine), including the alkaloid hydroxyisoleucine, which is considered to stimulate insulin secretion." (The drugs.com source)

Helpful data to include, especially for further researching the potential side effects. Bromallium (talk) 20:49, 2 July 2023 (UTC)

Dubious effects on metabolic syndrome

This revert was justified because the review authors describe in the results and conclusions the study's "significant limitations" which include 1) low quality of the included research, 2) vast heterogeneity of the data analyzed, 3) heterogeneity of the subjects having various disorders of metabolic syndrome, which is a complex of several subdiseases, and 4) extreme range of doses and durations used in the studies included (25 to 60000 mg/day and durations of dosing for 2 to 144 weeks). Not assessed or discussed are dietary and lifestyle factors impossible to control unless the subjects in the underlying studies were in a controlled environment (such as a hospital clinical trial unit).

These variations and limitations in study design and error control emphasize the overall variable, poor quality of dietary supplement and food studies of fenugreek or any dietary element. Reaching a conclusion for the article "that fenugreek could meaningfully " affect biomarkers of metabolic diseases is misleading and not a conclusion that any reputable clinical organization would state - see top of left pyramind, WP:MEDASSESS.

For the encyclopedia - which should be presenting clear facts supported by scientific consensus (not available for any review on fenugreek) - such limitations warrant the review not be included in the article. Zefr (talk) 17:48, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

• The authors acknowledge the limitations of the study, but I think this should be included in the research section because it points to research being done and research which should be continued. --Ben Best:Talk 13:39, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

This article is currently very far from scientific literature on the effects of fenugreek

It makes a few patently false claims like "there's no good evidence that fenugreek increases milk production"

Anyone who's taken a cursory look will not only see studies but meta analyses on fenugreek doing just that. One of many examples: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320315882_Effectiveness_of_fenugreek_as_a_galactagogue_A_network_meta-analysis

If your argument is there other studies that were unable to show a correlation then you have to at the very least change the statement to it not being "no good evidence" but rather it is scientifically controversial as to whether it increases milk production.

Fenugreek has also been shown to independently cause hormone changes in men as shown in other scientific studies (namely increased testosterone, measured directly in some and measured as increased performance in weight lifting).

As it stands this article is written very contradictory to the general scientific understanding of the effects of fenugreek.

I would have made some changes myself, but I'm on mobile and it's too much effort to add references on a smartphone 2A00:5400:F006:A424:1:1:18C3:89FC (talk) 12:10, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

If you have a WP:MEDORG national guideline or WP:MEDRS review in a reputable clinical journal (a 7 year old publication in Phytotherapy Research does not meet MEDRS), please provide it for review here. Use of fenugreek to treat any medical disorder is WP:FRINGE. As it stands, the article is accurate according to mainstream clinical literature and scientific consensus. Zefr (talk) 18:21, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure on what grounds you've chosen to disregard that study (and I'm not sure why you think 7 years old is significant enough to mention, that's not even old). The scientific literature is even more convincing for the case that fenugreek can play a role in controlling blood sugar levels in people with diabetes:

1. Neelakantan et al. (2014) - Published in Nutrition Journal:

This meta-analysis of 10 clinical trials found that fenugreek seeds significantly reduced fasting blood glucose, 2-hour post-load glucose, and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c).

2. Gong et al. (2016) - Published in Journal of Ethnopharmacology:

This meta-analysis of 12 studies concluded that fenugreek significantly improved fasting blood glucose, 2-hour post-load glucose, and HbA1c in people with both prediabetes and type 2 diabetes.

3. Dutta et al. (2017) - Published in Phytotherapy Research:

This systematic review and meta-analysis of 18 clinical trials found that fenugreek had a significant effect in reducing fasting blood glucose and HbA1c.

4. Zhu et al. (2021) - Published in Complementary Therapies in Medicine:

This meta-analysis of 14 randomized controlled trials showed that fenugreek supplementation significantly decreased fasting blood glucose, HbA1c, and homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance (HOMA-IR).

5. Rafraf et al. (2022) - Published in Phytotherapy Research:

This systematic review and meta-analysis of 20 randomized controlled trials found that fenugreek supplementation significantly reduced fasting blood glucose, insulin levels, and HOMA-IR in people with type 2 diabetes.

You might not like the state of the scientific research in this area and claim that more research is needed to be more certain of the claims, but to flatly say there's no evidence supporting the claim that this substance could have benefits or effects on the human body is just plain false.

2A00:5400:F006:A424:1:1:18C3:89FC (talk) 15:35, 27 June 2024 (UTC)