Talk:Oleandrin

sterol? steroid?

From the article at steroid, it seems technically oleandrin isn't a steroid. I guess it could be classified as a sterol ester. We should probably link to an appropriate ster* article. RandomP (talk) 14:47, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Topical Applications

Do we have data on topical applications of Oleandrin [derived from oleander (Nerium oleander L.), the evergreen shrub] or Nerium? Consider the current media blitz by the product called Nerium AD, which seems to require a topical application rather than internal consumption. MaynardClark (talk) 21:45, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

There may indeed be homeopathic remedies claiming to be based on oleander, but given the nature of homeopathics, any mention of them in this context can only result in confusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.1.214.5 (talk) 20:27, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

I checked, and in fact the most common homeopathic dose of oleander is 30C, which means 1 part of oleander is added to 100 parts of excipient, one 1/100 of the result is taken and added to 100 parts of excipient, etc. until this has been done 30 times, i.e. 1 part of oleander in 10^300 parts of excipient. If you understand what that means, you understand why any mention of homeopathic oleander is of no consequence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.1.214.5 (talk) 19:08, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

https://phys.org/news/2023-06-ai-path-safer-senolytic-compounds.html

recent news that seems to provide at least evidence of potential positive effect of topical application for some purposes. 37.29.175.217 (talk) 07:04, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Potential Split?

Although this subject isn't my bread and butter, a good amount of it seems to be related to its effect on humans. Feels like we should split a chunk of it off to "Human effects of Oleandrin" or something of the like. Just a thought Drewmutt (^ᴥ^) talk

Possible COVID 19 therapy, no fooling (I think)

Hi everybody! Just a note to let you know that I'm not pranking Wikipedia; Axios (a very reliable news source) really does say that Trump is promoting oleandrin as a treatment for COVID 19, with support from Dr. Ben Carson and also from the My-Pillow guy Mike Lindell. They're also promoting it as a dietary supplement. The Axios post on this is only a few hours old so I hope I'm not violating WP: NOTNEWS. BusinessInsider has reported this too. HandsomeMrToad (talk) 03:50, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

UPDATE: Can everybody please stop adding emotionally-loaded language to the section on COVID19? I agree that Oleandrin is unproven as a treatment for COVID, and this looks like another one of Trump's hype-and-sell tricks, and of course we all feel very strongly about this sort of thing, but we don't know whether or not it will work, and we should try to respect NPOV and keep an encyclopedic tone, and anyway the irony is stronger if you just state the facts and let the reader bring the emotions to the situation. (This is what makes Primo Levi such a great Holocaust-memoirist: he avoids histrionics and writes like a scientist, which is what he was.) Thank you. HandsomeMrToad (talk) 04:03, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-denies-pressing-fda-approve-oleandrin-1525821 Apparently is being pushed by the White House as of AUgust 20202601:640:C600:3C20:2DB5:3277:6BD4:B35A (talk) 18:28, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

→Fair, but phrasing it as "being considered" by unnamed entities suggests the degree of consideration is substantial and done by presumably legitimate groups. Would an encyclopedia say that the theory that the earth is flat is being considered? I don't know what the right language would be, but I don't believe that's it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.180.92.171 (talk) 04:48, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

He's certainly promoting it, but the sources clearly state that there is zero scientific evidence that it is safe or effective for that purpose and the only actual medical expert quoted says much more work needs to be done before even considering a human trial. We aren't here to push the unsupported POV that this does anything. Please review WP:MEDRS. NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 05:04, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

If people misinterpret this information, regardless of it's validity, and consume oleander leaves or any other part of the plant, there will be fatalities. Oleander is a very common ornamental shrub, and very toxic! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.1.214.5 (talk) 20:26, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

various problems

Chemical structure - the 6-methyl is missing (ring at lower left)

Structure - has a substitute of an acetyloxy - change "substitute" to "substitution" or just delete "a substitute of"

just like its derivate - change "derivate" to "derivative"

Synthesis - Oleandrin and its derivate - change "derivate" to "derivative"

The oleandrin itself can be won out of - change "won out of" to "isolated from"

Related substances - "apart from its pure form" does not make sense here; delete

Change "structural" to "structurally"

Mechanism of action - Na+ and K+ between the intercellular and extracellular spaces - intercellular is the same as extracellular; presumably it should be intracellular

the Na+ cannot be transported back into the extracellular membrane - change "membrane" to "medium" (the membrane is what separates intracellular from extracellular)

Symptoms - Symptoms of oleandrin poisoning can cause - the symptoms don't cause the effects, the symptoms are the effects; change "cause" to "include"

Treatment - consultation with a cardiologist is recommended when managing significant N. Oleander induced - oleander should not be capitalized & should be followed by - instead of a space

Effects on animals - Cases of sheep lethality have been reported to only one leaf - change "to" to "from"

References - 3. - transformation and fungal elecitation - change "elecitation" to "elicitation". 71.163.180.156 (talk) 07:57, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

You can make the changes yourself if supported by a WP:SCIRS source. Zefr (talk) 13:01, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

no clinical evidence of safety?

Phase I and Phase II clinical studies are by definition clinical evidence of safety. Even preliminary evidence is still evidence. Therefore the statement that there is no such evidence is false. My edit (with references) to correct this error was undone.

My proposed revision is as follows: Oleandrin is not yet fully approved by regulatory agencies in the United States as a prescription drug or dietary supplement. It has been approved by the FDA for clinical testing in humans. Phase I and Phase II clinical trials showed that oleandrin can be safely administered orally (PBI-05204), and Phase I data showed that it can be safely administered by intramuscular (IM) injection (Anvirzel)[2][3]Dr. Duckman (talk) 21:21, 6 March 2022 (UTC) Dr. Duckman (talk) 21:16, 6 March 2022 (UTC)

First, new discussion topics on a talk page go to the bottom of the page, WP:TALK.

I see no evidence in FDA publications that the agency has reviewed preclinical data on the compound and declared that it is safe. Afterall, it is toxic, as the article describes. Limited clinical trials in severely ill cancer patients are not evidence of safety or efficacy, and the trial results do indicate the oleandrin-related test drug was ineffective. Early-stage trials are primary research, which is not used to provide evidence of clinical acceptance for the encyclopedia. If this test drug were to ever gain acceptance according to a WP:MEDREV review, then it would be eligible for discussion. I doubt that will occur, based on the limited use, unsuccessful preliminary results in dying cancer patients, and nebulous results of trials to date. Zefr (talk) 22:28, 6 March 2022 (UTC)