|This article is written in British English (colour, realise, travelled), and some terms used in it are different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.|
|WikiProject Medicine / Gastroenterology||(Rated C-class, Low-importance)|
|WikiProject Dietary Supplements||(Rated C-class, High-importance)|
Sometimes prebiotics and Dietary fiber are treated as the same. e.g. [It's the fiber, stupid! gives this impression. The article needs clarification. (Or, if the two terms are identical or very closely related, the articles should be merged.) --Singkong2005 02:26, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
- Fibre and prebiotics are totally different, so there is no reason to merge them.Knorrepoes 06:48, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
I think the definition of prebiotics should mention its relationship to probiotics. Prebiotics are oligosaccharides (mostly from dietary fiber, though not exclusively) that are fermented by the gut bacteria. These mostly beneficial bacteria are known as probiotics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probiotic). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gtaniwaki (talk • contribs) 16:52, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
FiberDude (talk) 21:42, 23 February 2010 (UTC) "probiotics" are in fact mentioned in the definition, specifically: "bacteria in the digestive system which are beneficial to the health of the body"... "probiotics" is really a misnomer, while colloquially used as a blanket term for these beneficial bacteria, it is actually properly used to refer only to supplements/functional foods with these bacteria, not the proper term for the beneficial bacteria themselves. Probiotics are also mentioned in the "see also" section. In my opinion, the article as it stands is appropriately informative and referenced vis-a-vis probiotics.
Ingredients of a Jerusalem artichoke?
"Typical dietary sources of prebiotics are Jerusalem artichokes, which contain inulin, raw oats, and unrefined wheat or barley."
I have eaten many Jerusalem artichokes, and none of them contained any cereals whatsoever. In fact, it's a tuber, and thus contains nothing except Jerusalem artichoke.
I think this is an "Eats, shoots and leaves" issue. Thus, I'll change it to:
"Typical dietary sources of prebiotics are Jerusalem artichokes (which contain inulin), raw oats, unrefined wheat and unrefined barley."
right vs left colon
Unless something has changed recently, most mammals should fement shorter chain carbohydrates in the *right* colon, and longer chain carbs in the *left* colon because of the normal flow (the small intestine leads to the cecum and the right or ascending colon, and the left colon leads to the sigmoid colon then the rectum and finally the anus.
I've changed the 'left' and 'right' designations of the article respectively.
Moved from article : Again, one may wish to recall that Roberfroid, whom many consider the pre-eminent authority on prebiotics, states that only two specific fructooligosaccharides - oligofructose and inulin - meet his seminal definition of "Prebiotic."
Roberfoid is not the only one who works on probiotics, many research groups world-wide so do. However, he has been very often used as a consultant for Orafti, which makens.... fructo-oligosaccharides. Considering this, he is seen by many as the spokesperson of this industry, which can be seen by his single-minded promotion of fructo-oligosaccharides. If he wants to do so, fine by me, but that means that his remarks should not be placed so prominently in the articl.Knorrepoes (talk) 11:32, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
FiberDude (talk) 21:39, 23 February 2010 (UTC)While I think Roberfroid - co-author of the paper that first distinctly described prebiotics - has a bit more eminence than just another "one who works on prebiotics," I do think the duplicative "Again" reference mentioned in the post above could be removed, leaving only one reference to Roberfroid and his views on FOS/Prebiotics.
Intermediate position between food and drug, and intermediate regulatory scrutiny of health claims
I revised the introductory paragraph to indicate the intermediate position prebiotics occupy between foods and drugs, and therefore the typically intermediate level of scrutiny they receive of the health claims made concerning them. In a subsequent paragraph, I condensed the previous discussion (which I thought was too detailed for this article) of whether galactose oligosaccharides should be considered prebiotics, merely noting that disagreement exists about this and linking to the galactose oligosaccharide article.CharlesHBennett (talk) 04:15, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
By virtue of the tables showing mostly values for raw foods the article gives the misleading (as far as my understanding goes) impression that these foods need to be eaten raw to gain prebiotic benefits. Can somebody correct this please? 18.104.22.168 (talk) 11:04, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Well, I think that it's generally true, the cooked ones may not even appear on the list, as they may have an insignificant amount of prebiotic fiber left after cooking, yet cooked onion still appears on the list. Hmm. The study that was referenced also includes the food cooked, possibly I'll expand the wiki article to include that. Mike44456 (talk) 14:17, 30 January 2012 (UTC)