Talk:Lactobacillus sporogenes

"This bacteria does not exist" BUT "The official name of this bacterium is Bacillus coagulans" - AND "The name was changed in 1937" - this article is self-contradictory throughout and appears to have been cobbled together but someone with no understanding of the subject. 84.64.232.236 08:56, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

It transpires this may be because the article has been largely plagiarized from the food-info.net website listed in the references. 84.64.232.236 09:03, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

I think this looks contradicting each other because of a wrong translation. First this bacteria was called LACTOBACILLUS sporogenes, but it was renamed into a BACILLUS species, because they discover it was not a lactobacillus. Now the Lactobacillus sporogenes is not a name anymore. BACILLUS gives no healthy effect when added, so it is wrong when you claim that your product is healthy by giving a wrong name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.224.252.10 (talk • contribs) 15:06, 14 June 2006


 * A look at the food-info.net article in the references gives other information than 137.224.252.10 gives above. According to that site, Lactobacillus sporogenes is not an old name abandoned by science but a "fantasy name" in the way that it was never used by science. I do not know which version is correct, but if Lactobacillus sporogenes is the same as Bacillus coagulans then this article should be merged into the article with correct name. The food-info page however says that Lactobacillus sporogenes also might be Clostridium sporogenes (in some products then, I assume?) which makes it all more difficult. // Habj 06:58, 22 June 2006 (UTC)


 * A couple of links I found that seem useful
 * Literature study from the Medline and PubMed database
 * Sporeformers as human probiotics, paper in scientific journal
 * // Habj 07:19, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

As a completely lay person, all I want to know is: Is a product containing 'Lactobacillus Sporogenes' such as 'Higher Nature Probio-Daily' good for you? Does it do what it claims on the jar, i.e. have 'good' bacteria that can withstand stomach acid and then 'flower' in the colon and intestines thus aiding the digestive system. It would appear from the Wikipedia entry for it that it has no health benefits at all and that it's a sham product? Will someone, (appropriately qualified so to do), substantiate this claim or else update the record with evidence supporting it's efficacy please - thanks! Is this just an argument over nomenclature, i.e. it should be called something else or is it an argument over whether or not this product actually works? Please clarify.

This is a discussion on nomenclature and thus misleading of consumers. The page should be merged with B. coagulans, where it can be mentioned that L. sporogenes is a non official synonym, see also the (new) page on this matter on [http://www.food-info.net/uk/ff/sporogenes.htm Food-Info.net on B. coagulans/L. sporogenes] (Knorrepoes, Nov 29, 2006)