Talk:Sida cordifolia

This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past.

Plants Mid‑importance

	Plants portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany 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.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Alternative medicine

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Alternative medicine related articles 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.Alternative medicineWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative medicineTemplate:WikiProject Alternative medicineAlternative medicine articles

Is[edit]

Is this plant subject to the U.S. bans described in Ephedra? -- Beland 19:03, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can a scientist do a review so that the article has a more scientific basis? At the moment it has no value because it has no evidence supporting it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.4.204.28 (talk) 14:18, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not Gibberish[edit]

It's not gibberish to me. It's Indian herbal medicine. Needs a copy-ed, though. See http://www.sidacordifolia.com/ and http://www.cnpprofessional.co.uk/sida-cordifolia-fat-burner-p-48.html It does contain 'ephedrine and pseudoephedrine' apparently, but whether it's subject to US government ban or not I don't know - and it doesn't affect its suitability for inclusion in Wikipedia. Available in the UK as a so-called 'fat-burner'. I say keep it. (I'm not promoting its use - I say nothing on the efficacy or otherwise of the stuff. It is there, it is sold, people do use it.) Peridon (talk) 16:10, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It certainly isn't an Encyclopaedia quality article - I have difficulty comprehending the first paragraph. The drug is used all over the world, and has been subject to several intense clinical trials, so having the article chock full of Indian (I'm not even sure what language they are) words is completely inappropriate and confusing.Jamief00 (talk) 15:35, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unbalanced[edit]

Needs alot of info on ecology and native distribution etc. to balance the medicine stuff. Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:53, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

a good list of where it is weedy. papers to check and add. Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:53, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Paper providing an LD50[edit]

http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6882/12/120