Talk:vitaminergic

RFV discussion: September 2015–January 2016
I'll give this one the benefit of the doubt. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 03:20, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
 * It's totally wrong. For a start, it's an adjective, not a noun. The definition uses the word itself without any explanation. Also, it is from a user who repeatedly adds total rubbish. I would either just delete it or, even better, replace it with a proper adjectival definition. SemperBlotto (talk) 06:36, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I have converted the definition to an adjective. It seems to be rare, but used in a small number of related papers. SemperBlotto (talk) 09:50, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I added a second cite that is unrelated to that cluster of papers found by SemperBlotto. Kiwima (talk) 06:17, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
 * : I'm unclear on whether either of you found a third independent cite for this entry. If you did, could you please add it? —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 05:42, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry, that second one was all I found other than the cluster around the one Ascorbic Acid paper. Kiwima (talk) 18:28, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * On Google Scholar, I can find quite a few works which state that ascorbic acid is a vitaminergic neurotransmitter, citing Karanth et al (the 2001 citation); I've added one to the entry. I suppose it's debatable whether they're independent of Karanth or not. I can also find this, which seems to be independent:
 * 2012, B. Beck, C. Bossenmeyer-Pourié, et al, Increased homocysteinemia is associated with beneficial effects on body weight after long-term high-protein, low-fat diet in rats, in Nutrition:
 * Because vitamin B12 and folate contents were the same in each diet and HP rats ate about the same quantity of diet in g/d (Table 2), the measured Hcy increase was not related to the vitaminergic composition itself, but rather to the availability of the ingested folate.
 * I suppose this is cited now. - -sche (discuss) 19:33, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you. For the record, I consider uses that cite Karanth et al. 2001 not to be independent from that paper, because it's common to use another group's terminology and not explicitly say "sensu Karanth et al." when you're just going to cite them at the end of the sentence anyway. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 19:46, 24 January 2016 (UTC)


 * RFV passed. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 19:46, 24 January 2016 (UTC)