User talk:81.147.170.253

September 2020
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Bacopa monnieri. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. ''Don't put nonsense into the encyclopedia. There is no food, drug, or plant that induces 'dendritic branching'. Plain ridiculous. Read WP:MEDRS - that is the standard sourcing for Wikipedia medical content. Also, do not edit war - WP:WAR. You can start a discussion on the talk page if you wish, but this has already been debated and eliminated there.'' Zefr (talk) 19:22, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Being offended by scientific evidence
Bacopa monnieri can indeed stimulate dendritic branching (an increase in the number of dendrite branches connecting neurons), as you'll see if you read this paper:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3093798/

There's also no need to put dendritic branching in inverted commas; it is a real thing, sometimes referred to as dendrite arborization. See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dendrite. It isn't hard to see how dendrite arborization may be stimulated if you look at how complex that process is and how many variables are involved in its regulation.

I'm sure you think of yourself as the arbiter of what is and isn't "plain ridiculous", but I'm sorry to have to tell you that you aren't; for that we have a process of hypothesis and falsification supported by peer review. Sometimes you may disagree with that evidence. The idea of you being wrong may even be a little scary, especially if you've spent so long editing Wikipedia and proclaiming yourself the arbiter of fact, but I promise there's nothing to be scared of. Try not to haughtily dismiss ideas as "plain ridiculous" when there is ample evidence to support them. It's strange to seem so offended by someone proposing something and providing scientific evidence to back it up.

Are you going to allow a mention of dendritic arborization on the Bacopa monnieri page - properly cited - or not? If not, why not? Do you have a problem with the studies cited? By what mechanism do you think Bacopa monnieri enhances cognition?
 * Wikipedia is an encyclopedia of best-established facts supported by reviews published in reputable peer-reviewed publications, not a journal of early-stage research or a newspaper reporting new results from the rat lab. Spend time reading all the sections of WP:MEDRS and WP:WHYMEDRS. The 'plain ridiculous' comment is appropriate for a claim many years or decades from having adequate proof (if it ever could have confirmable evidence), and for use in Ayurveda which is plain quackery nonsense. Consuming a bacopa leaf extract to cause a change in brain structure? Yes, that is plain ridiculous. Zefr (talk) 14:23, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

'''Response ''' Substances obtained from plants can indeed cause changes in brain structure. For example, caffeine use leads to adenosine receptor proliferation (as a way to compensate for receptor blocking by caffeine), and opiates can similarly "reshape" the brain through dendrite morphology. Both of those substances are ultimately obtained from plants, even though you might think of them as "chemicals". Brain structures are actually changing all the time, with plasticity occurring most frequently at the synapse, and external factors can greatly change how that plasticity occurs. I don't know why you assume such a haughty tone when neurochemistry clearly isn't something you're comfortable with.

With regards to your edit warring and your snarky tone, I must say I'm disappointed. I fully expected some degree of arrogance from someone who allows themselves to be degraded by Wikipedia awards, but this was still surprising. You must try not to get so upset when someone dares to question you. Your Wikipedia status means nothing to me (nor to anyone outside of this content repository), and I still disagree with your editorial decisions. The fact you've deleted valid, well-supported points about Bacopa's effects on cognition tells me you aren't the scrupulous editor you think you are. I have no idea what the quackery comment is about; I was making no reference to traditional medicine.

Happy to leave that there. There's no point appealing your absurd edits since Wikipedia is just an exercise in back-patting.