Talk:Jesuit's bark

message: The article states:
: Tafur had frequent intercourse with the celebrated Jesuit theologian John de Lugo
Is that correct? There are no references. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pgrote (talk • contribs) 06:54, 20 May 2007
* The original meaning of "intercourse" is simply "interaction", e.g. discussion, hence, some say, the Quaker- or Amish-founded town of Intercourse, Pennsylvania. Use of the phrase "sexual intercourse" as a euphemism (cf. "criminal conversation") and decline of its more general use have changed the primary meaning. So a source, esp'ly an old one, may well have emphasized the ongoing communication between them as a factor in the propagation of the discovery. Lesson: be prepared to put your sources into their real contexts, not just your own context.--Jerzy•t 06:44, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism ? 

message: This article is full of errors.
*  It states:  "She [i.e., the wife of the viceroy of Peru] returned to Europe in 1640 and was the first to bring the bark there to spread its use through Spain and the rest of the continent, as stated by Markham."  
:In the immediately following sentence, it states:  "For the earliest transportation of the bark we must thank the Jesuit Barnabé de Cobo (1582–1657; the Cobæa plant), who rendered important services in the exploration of Mexico and Peru. In his capacity of procurator of the Peruvian province of his order, he brought the bark from Lima to Spain, and afterwards to Rome and other parts of Italy, in 1632."  
:How could both the viceroy's wife and the Jesuit de Cobo be "first" to bring the bark to Spain — particularly considering that de Cabo arrived in 1632, whereas the viceroy's wife arrived 8 years later?
*  The viceroy's wife died in Cartagena, Columbia, during her voyage to Spain, so she couldn't have brought cinchon bark to Spain.
*  The first cinchon bark was brought to Spain by the Jesuit procurators Father Alonso Messia Venegas and Father Hernando de Leon Garavito.
*  According to the records of the city of Lima, Peru, which were examined in 1930, it was the viceroy — not his wife — who contracted malaria and was cured of it by cinchona bark.
The whole "History" section is virtually undocumented and riddled with errors.  Anyone reading it will be led astray.
Errors in the early history of quinine are not unique to this article.  I'm also correcting the "Quinine" and "History of malaria" articles. 
VexorAbVikipædia (talk) 02:25, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Errors 

message: Quinine keeps me alive...having Lupus. May I add a paragraph about the millions taking quinine for autoimmune disease?  Soltera (talk) 20:38, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: You may if you can supply a reference for quinine preventing autoimmune disease, and being taken by millions for that purpose. Maproom (talk) 23:21, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chloroquine? 

message: Although the article states that "missionaries in Peru were taught the healing power of the bark by natives," it is worth noting that the "natives" had not had malaria until the missionaries arrived, therefore what was the bark being used for in Pre-Columbian times? Cmacauley (talk) 16:07, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Malaria was introduced to Peru by Europeans 

message: Should the word "quinine" appear somewhere in the article?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:1E08:6160:B053:F0C3:48D5:73B7 (talk) 02:38, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  quinine 

message: Simply added tags as I didn't feel myself up to the task of correcting the article, but if anyone is interested the quinine article is probably a good place to start and compare, especially with the Countess myth. Yutah123|UPage|(talk)✶ 22:05, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical Accuracy