Jump to content

Talk:Anthocyanin

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Anthocyanins and cancer

[edit]

There has already been discussion about cancer and antioxidants with someone saying there is zero research to demonstrate anti cancer activity or antioxidant activity. This is incorrect. The following studies clearly demonstrate this:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16970933 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21058201

There are also more studies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:84:AA58:3694:C4E6:D9F4:9FF5:71DA (talk) 21:22, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Those are preliminary lab studies, WP:PRIMARY, which are inadequate to assess human disease mechanisms and therefore are not suitable in an encyclopedia to infer anti-cancer effects. We need quality of sources meeting WP:MEDASSESS (left pyramid, level of evidence needed, where the studies you cite are the lowest quality) to discuss anti-cancer effects of anthocyanins, for which there are no adequate studies. --Zefr (talk) 23:09, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not much has changed in 5 years because most of the studies appear to be on rodents, in human studies there is poor bioavailability and the doses are usually low. You might find this interesting [1]. Psychologist Guy (talk) 17:46, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Although I found one review of trials [2] that found that high doses of anthocyanins (>300 mg/day) was shown to reduce vascular inflammation. Psychologist Guy (talk) 17:57, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Concur, although one could say "not much has changed since the 2010 EFSA review" (under In humans). In Europe, the US and Canada, anthocyanins are not approved as food additives (absence of toxicity data), food manufacturers are not allowed health claims on package labels, and supplement manufacturers prefer to advertize the plant source (e.g., blueberries) rather than the extract. In other words, there's no real-world case where people would consume 300 mg/day of anthocyanins, and there's much less of a chance that a series of clinical trials on such a dose would be undertaken to assess anti-disease effects. Zefr (talk) 21:17, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I see there has been a large review with all the recent data on the topic [3] which looked at (57 studies and 2 134 336 participants). Psychologist Guy (talk) 18:16, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The full article is here. Reviewing the criteria for studies included, it's not convincing that the source, dose, or specificity of ACNs are certain, raising doubts that cloud interpretation, as occurs for any mixed-diet questionnaire (upon which nearly all the involved studies were based). These studies always have limitations of human memory at play.
When ACN-related foods are consumed, how are metabolites or other polyphenols/dietary factors ruled in or out, such as vitamin C or fiber? The reviews (and their studies) included were not clarified as dose- or ACN-specific, which raises concern about safety, as expressed by EFSA (ref. 4). One index for application of such a review in the general public is whether ACNs are cleared as safe and effective food additives by EFSA or the FDA, a hurdle not attained by ACN manufacturers. Zefr (talk) 19:44, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
One would have to have a lot of education in biochemistry and research the bioavailability and absorption of anthocyanins to answer that question, maybe you could have a go at expanding the article on a section about bioavailability. I agree with you that the bioavailability has been reported to be low but this appears to be for nonacylated anthocyanins that are found in berries such as blackberry, blackcurrant and blueberries. For example this recent review from 2022 noted that "application of blueberry anthocyanins is limited due to their instability and the difficulty in absorption and utilization by the human body" [4]. So what you are saying is correct but acylated anthocyanins have a better absorption, bioavailability and stability and these are found in purple vegetables and tubers. Our Wikipedia article does not mention acylated anthocyanins or the bioavailability differences between those and nonacylated anthocyanins. I suspect the review paper I cited earlier was looking at foods high in acylated anthocyanins (red cabbage, purple potatoes, black carrots) but I can't find information in that paper about the specific foods eaten, I would have to go through all the trials to find that information but I doubt the subjects were eating just blueberries. I think this review would help the article [5]. The review describes the structural differences between nonacylated and acylated anthocyanins. There is another that went into a lot of this [6].
I agree with you that the Linus Pauling Institute is a reliable source and should be used but as it was last updated in 2016 it is missing recent reviews published between 2018 and 2022 and does not mention acylated anthocyanins. This paper I think would also be useful to help Wikipedia readers know the differences between the types of anthocyanins as it describes which different foods they are found in [7]. As anthocyanins are categorized as either acylated or nonacylated that are found in different food sources, I believe this should be made clear on the article. Psychologist Guy (talk) 00:09, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure about including this technical differentiation, which is still developing in basic research and likely to be confusing for the general user without discussion; note about WP:NOTTEXTBOOK. The section "In humans" is fine as a general state of science, despite its older sources. If you want to draft a sentence, this review is better than the other, which has misleading content from lab research (example, this graphic under Function), but both are complex sources for the general user. Zefr (talk) 04:20, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Anthocyanins are permitted as additives (E 163) and have been assessed by EFSA [[8]]. The absence of health claims is no evidence for absence of a health effect, because health claims are expensive to submit and are assessed based on rules; a health claim might be accepted or rejected based on formalities and not necessarily scientific consensus (e.g. the flavan-3-ol health claim of 200 mg is most likely too low to be meaningful, but it met the EFSA criteria). Health claims have been very popular for some time, but the popularity vaned as there are easier ways to promote foods (most notably via University press releases).
Observational studies are difficult to interpret - especially the big US studies don't use data on socio-economic status and anthocyanin intake is often a simple indicator of that (anthocyanins are mainly from berries, and they are expensive). The only alternative are nutritional biomarkers, but I'm not aware of a study that has conducted such research (even though they could be easily measured in urine, but biomarker studies have currently mainly been conducted in the European EPIC cohort, mainly on flavanols and isoflavones).
I think it is important to keep in perspective that it is impossible to identify health effects without RCTs with the actual compounds and not foods. There have been a few small scale trials which will have been reviewed, but it's rather weak - especially when compared e.g. to flavanols where there has been the Minnesota Green Tea Trial and COSMOS. So I would generally be very cautious with claims of health benefits.
Ggux (talk) 10:13, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A recent review that looked at 57 studies and more than 2.1 million participant found no association between anthocyanin and cancers [9], online in full [10] Psychologist Guy (talk) 15:59, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Removed Quote

[edit]

Article did previously contain a quote that the body treated these as poisons and seeks to be rid of them. Please help me find the source? Drsruli (talk) 22:55, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is still in the quote (number 53) https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/901030 (study from 2007). It is not described as poison as far as i took notice, just "The body sees them as foreign compounds and modifies them for rapid excretion in the urine and bile." Maybe annother? The following source here i found patent due the lack of expression in the article concerning the problems in research of the Anthocyanin within the human metabolism https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1082894/ (study from 2004). Well, a lot of time has passed. But not much change has occured up to date as far as i can take notice from the article.2A02:810A:10BF:9AA4:38D6:91D6:4301:D7B (talk) 07:10, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I guess that that must be it. Drsruli (talk) 04:08, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Various reasons for including a section about Chemical synthesis

[edit]

Scientific Relevance: The chemical synthesis of anthocyanins is a significant aspect of their study. Understanding how these compounds can be synthesized in the lab contributes to a fuller understanding of their chemical structure and properties.


Interdisciplinary Importance: The synthesis of anthocyanins is not just relevant to chemistry but also to fields like pharmacology, food science, and materials science. These compounds have various applications, from natural food colorants to potential therapeutic agents.


Historical Context: The history of anthocyanin synthesis, starting from the early work by Nobel laureate Sir Robert Robinson, provides valuable historical context to the field of organic chemistry. It showcases the evolution of synthetic methods over time.


Technological Advancements: Including the chemical synthesis section would allow for the discussion of technological advancements in the field. For example, newer methods might offer higher yields or more environmentally friendly processes, which is valuable information for researchers and professionals.


Educational Value: For students and individuals new to the topic, understanding how anthocyanins are synthesized can provide insights into organic chemistry techniques, research methodologies, and the practical challenges of compound synthesis.


Completeness: Wikipedia aims to provide comprehensive, encyclopedic coverage of topics. A section on chemical synthesis would make the article on anthocyanins more complete and informative.


Citation and Verification: The synthesis methods are well-documented in scientific literature, providing a reliable and verifiable source of information to back up the content.


Public Interest: With the growing interest in natural products and their applications, the public is increasingly interested in how such compounds are made, whether naturally or synthetically.


Global Research: Chemical synthesis of anthocyanins is a topic of global research interest, making it relevant to a worldwide audience.


Future Research: Highlighting the current state of anthocyanin synthesis can help identify areas where further research is needed, thereby potentially inspiring future scientific investigations.


Here is a template for how Chemical Synthesis of Anthocyanins could be implemented:

Chemical Synthesis of Anthocyanins (Template)

Anthocyanins have been synthesized through various methods, contributing to our understanding of these complex molecules.

Early Work by Sir Robert Robinson Nobel laureate Sir Robert Robinson was the first to synthesize anthocyanins in the early 20th century.[1]

Dangeles' Contribution In 1994, Dangeles et al. added to the body of knowledge with their own synthesis method.[2]

Kondo's Method Kondo's 2006 synthesis offered a different approach, notable for its high yield.[3] 92.221.98.77 (talk) 17:35, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Robertson, Alexander; Robinson, Robert (1928). "Experiments on the synthesis of anthocyanins. Part V. A synthesis of 3-β-glucosidylpelargonidin chloride". J. Chem. Soc.: 1460–1472. doi:10.1039/JR9280001460.
  2. ^ Dangles, Olivier; Elhajji, Hakima (1994). "Synthesis of 3-Methoxy- and 3-(?-D-Glucopyranosyloxy)flavylium Ions". Helv. Chim. Acta. 77: 1595–1610. doi:10.1002/hlca.19940770616.
  3. ^ Oyama, Kin-ichi; Kawaguchi, Satoshi; Yoshida, Kumi; Kondo, Tadao (2007). "Synthesis of pelargonidin 3-O-6″-O-acetyl-β-d-glucopyranoside". Tetrahedron Letters. 48: 6005–6009. doi:10.1016/j.tetlet.2007.06.134.

All this could be reduced to 2-3 sentences. The sources are outdated - use a WP:SCIRS review published within the past 5 years. Zefr (talk) 18:12, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

While I appreciate the emphasis on brevity and current sources, reducing the chemical synthesis section to just a few sentences might not provide the most informative and high-quality article for readers. Sir Robert Robinson's work, although dated, is seminal in this field and offers valuable historical context. I agree that recent reviews are important and should be included, but they should complement, not replace, foundational work like Robinson's. Direct citations to such work add depth and credibility to the article. 92.221.98.77 (talk) 18:29, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not a textbook of history or methods on a single topic, WP:NOTTEXTBOOK #6-7; also WP:NOTEVERYTHING. Zefr (talk) 19:02, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I understand Wikipedia's guidelines on scope and focus, as outlined in WP:NOTTEXTBOOK and WP:NOTEVERYTHING. My intention is not to turn the article into a textbook but to provide a well-rounded view of anthocyanins, which includes their chemical synthesis. This information is not only of historical interest but also of current scientific relevance. I believe a balanced approach can be achieved without compromising the article's quality or Wikipedia's guidelines. Would you be open to a compromise that includes a concise yet informative section on this aspect? 92.221.98.77 (talk) 19:06, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please provide a concise draft for editors to review here. Zefr (talk) 19:10, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The chemical synthesis of anthocyanins has been a subject of scientific inquiry since the early 20th century. Nobel laureate Sir Robert Robinson was a pioneer in this area, successfully synthesizing anthocyanins as early as 1928. His work has been foundational for the field and has influenced subsequent methods. In 1994, Dangeles et al. introduced a different approach to anthocyanin synthesis, contributing to the body of knowledge on these complex molecules. Kondo's 2006 synthesis started with the glycosylation of epicatechin, achieving an impressive initial yield of 71%. However, the method only yielded traces of the final product, cyanidin 3-glc, after five additional steps. Despite this, Kondo's approach is interesting for its divergence from other methods. These synthetic methods have broader implications, impacting fields such as pharmacology, food science, and materials science. Current research in this area aims to improve both the yield and the economic feasibility of anthocyanin synthesis.. 92.221.98.77 (talk) 19:13, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
More concise for a section on History: In 1835, the German pharmacist Ludwig Clamor Marquart gave the name Anthokyan to a chemical compound that gives flowers a blue color for the first time in his treatise "Die Farben der Blüthen".[ref] The chemical synthesis of anthocyanins was first accomplished by Nobel laureate Robert Robinson in 1928. Different approaches to anthocyanin synthesis followed over several decades,[refs] facilitating development in pharmacology, food science, and materials science.[ref] Zefr (talk) 19:23, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your concise draft and the suggestion to include this information in a "History" section. I agree that this could be a good way to present the evolution of anthocyanin synthesis while keeping the article focused and informative. Your draft captures the essence well, and incorporating it into a history context seems like a balanced approach. 92.221.98.77 (talk) 19:28, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You can provide the content and sources, then add the section as last in the article - its history is not key for understanding anthocyanins for the general user. Zefr (talk) 19:33, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Anthocyanins have been used for centuries in traditional medicine and as natural dyes, long before formal scientific investigation began. In modern times, the study of anthocyanins dates back to 1835 when German pharmacist Ludwig Clamor Marquart first named the compound "Anthokyan" in his treatise "Die Farben der Blüthen." The modern era of anthocyanin research was significantly advanced by Nobel laureate Sir Robert Robinson, who successfully synthesized these compounds in 1928. His foundational work laid the groundwork for future research and has been cited as a seminal contribution to the field.
In 1994, Dangeles et al. introduced a different approach to anthocyanin synthesis, further enriching our understanding of these complex molecules. Kondo's 2006 synthesis took a unique route, starting with the glycosylation of epicatechin and achieving an initial yield of 71%. Despite only yielding traces of the final product, Kondo's method is noteworthy for its innovative approach.
In recent years, research into the potential applications of anthocyanins has gained traction, particularly in fields such as pharmacology, food science, and materials science. Advances in synthetic methods aim to improve both the yield and the economic feasibility of anthocyanin synthesis, reflecting the compound's growing importance across multiple disciplines. 92.221.98.77 (talk) 19:44, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's verbose and non-neutral (promotional). Work from this, fill in the sources:
In 1835, the German pharmacist Ludwig Clamor Marquart gave the name Anthokyan to a chemical compound that gives flowers a blue color for the first time in his treatise "Die Farben der Blüthen".[ref] The chemical synthesis of anthocyanins was first accomplished by Nobel laureate Robert Robinson in 1928. Different approaches to anthocyanin synthesis followed over several decades,[refs] facilitating development in pharmacology, food science, and materials science.[ref]
Zefr (talk) 19:53, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your input and the concise draft. While brevity has its merits, a slightly more verbose text can sometimes make the information more digestible for a general audience. Wikipedia is a lexicon meant to be read by humans, and a bit of elaboration can help in understanding complex topics like anthocyanins. I believe the additional details in the proposed section could enrich the reader's understanding without overwhelming them. 92.221.98.77 (talk) 20:11, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe something like this?
Anthocyanins have been used for centuries in traditional medicine and as natural dyes, long before formal scientific investigation began. The modern study of anthocyanins dates back to 1835 when German pharmacist Ludwig Clamor Marquart first named the compound 'Anthokyan.' Nobel laureate Sir Robert Robinson significantly advanced the field by synthesizing these compounds in 1928, laying the groundwork for future research. Several new methods have been introduced in subsequent years. In recent years, research into the potential applications of anthocyanins has gained traction, particularly in fields such as pharmacology, food science, and materials science. Advances in synthetic methods aim to improve both the yield and the economic feasibility of anthocyanin synthesis, reflecting the compound's growing importance across multiple disciplines. 92.221.98.77 (talk) 20:28, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that the focus is more on biosynthesis rather than chemical synthesis. Could you please expand a bit on why you think biosynthesis is more key for understanding anthocyanins for the general user? I'd like to understand the rationale behind this to better contribute to the article. 92.221.98.77 (talk) 21:39, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Your version reads like advocacy in promoting anthocyanins and methods of synthesis, WP:NOTADVOCACY. Other editors can assess and should be allowed input before further article revisions. Zefr (talk) 23:09, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I understand the concern about WP:NOTADVOCACY, but I believe the main focus of a lexicon like Wikipedia should be to be factual and informative. The aim is not to promote anthocyanins or their methods of synthesis, but rather to provide a comprehensive understanding of the subject.
To draw an analogy, abstaining from discussing the effects of a certain medicine or the properties of a specific engine for fear of it appearing promotional would limit the article's informational value. I believe that a balanced, factual presentation of both biosynthesis and chemical synthesis would serve the reader's interest in a comprehensive understanding of anthocyanins. 92.221.98.77 (talk) 06:09, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For a balanced approach to both biosynthesis and chemical synthesis, I'd recommend checking the Wikipedia article on taxol. It provides a comprehensive view without appearing promotional, and could serve as a model for how we might approach the anthocyanins article. 2001:2020:4349:DAB9:0:0:17B5:D98F (talk) 08:34, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Food Chart

[edit]

Please let the chart be sortable. Drsruli (talk) 03:54, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Anthocyanin&oldid=1246894962"