Talk:Aloe

message: I don't think the heraldry link is right....its to the wrong kind!
aloe is of the family liliaceae (the lily family) or aloaceae, not whatever is written here
i really do like this article it is very awesome.
The phrase "The dose is 130-320 mg, that of aloin being 30-130 mg. " What sort of way is that to start a paragraph? The portion that follows that line is overly scientific, and meaningless to a layman. What's a "haemorrhoid" anyway and where's the hyperlink? "The drug is obviously contraindicated" Obviously? What the hell is obvious about that? 
The comment above references dosage.  It's important to know how much aloe vera gel to drink (too much could be bad).  The Aloe Vera Studies Organization recommends between two to four ounces, two times a day. ( I suppose this is for adults.  They really should say how much for teenagers and children. ) Healthguru321 21:03, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've tried to start on a cleanup, and removed a few small bits I couldn't find documentation for. But it needs a lot more - MPF 13:25, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: This article is junk

message: I merged this article with aloe. The content is in the "unproven" benefits section. The information needs to be verified. -- Kjkolb 11:01, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Aloe Vera Benefits to Skin]] 

message: Looks to me that what this needs more than anything is to have the material on Aloë vera moved out into a separate article. Brya 15:04, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, or something like Aloe (herbal remedy) since it should be possible to have an Aloe vera article about the species, and as the article says the remedies often include extracts from multiple species. Stan 00:34, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That is a good point. I am not at all clear if more than one species is involved. There are too many general statements here, which of course is typical of marketting plant products. Brya 07:38, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree too. Let'us split some of this article off into an aloe herbal remedy article. Sjschen 02:21, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Definitely Aloe vera? - checked a few references, all gave maxima of 80-100 cm. There are about 400 species, some of which get much larger (e.g. A. dichotoma, to 9 m tall). - MPF 09:43, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Sounds good to me - but which parts to split off? Some of the medicinal material may apply to other Aloe spp. MidgleyDJ 21:24, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed; the Aloe vera page should be about the species, with all the medicinal uses for the genus on a separate page (Stan's suggested title is a good idea) linked from both the species page and from this genus page - MPF 09:43, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I removed much of the unreferenced, untested or unsubstantiated claims re: Aloe bardadensis (Aloe vera). I'm also in favour of the split, though some compounds etc dervied from Aloes come from other species eg: Aloe ferrox. MidgleyDJ 22:10, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Three of the other Aloe species already have their own articles, Aloe aristata, Aloe dichotoma, Aloe variegata and the rest are red links. I agree it is fair that Aloe vera should have its own article - it does not need to be very different for the other aloes to motivate that. // Habj 08:43, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

text:  Probably the best solution would be, as suggested in the section above, to move all the herbal medicine aspects of the aloes to a separate article. // Habj 08:50, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done; Aloe vera now has its own page - MPF 10:54, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Aloe vera

message: Aloe vera is different to other Aloes -- ie. "true aloe".  It is the variety used medicinally and it is important that the aloe vera article is separate to the aloe article.--Fawxes 09:11, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed much of the unreferenced, untested or unsubstantiated claims re: Aloe bardadensis (Aloe vera). I'm also in favour of the split, though some compounds etc dervied from Aloes come from other species eg: Aloe ferrox. MidgleyDJ 22:10, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Three of the other Aloe species already have their own articles, Aloe aristata, Aloe dichotoma, Aloe variegata and the rest are red links. I agree it is fair that Aloe vera should have its own article - it does not need to be very different for the other aloes to motivate that. // Habj 08:43, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

text:  Probably the best solution would be, as suggested in the section above, to move all the herbal medicine aspects of the aloes to a separate article. // Habj 08:50, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done; Aloe vera now has its own page - MPF 10:54, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Definitely move the Aloe Vera Part

message: My thoughts were the majority of "extracts" of Aloe came from Aloe vera. I've moved the material on wound healing/cosmetics to Aloe vera. Do we have any references for the internal uses section? MidgleyDJ 19:57, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aloe extracts? 

message: The article currently features an incomplete listing of species? Do we want to keep this system (with the link to complete list?) Or would it be better to discuss groups of Aloe's ie: tree Aloes, stemless Aloes, creeping Aloes etc? MidgleyDJ 19:59, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  list of species? 

message: The article has been restructured slightly, but the content has not been changed to help with the cleanup effort. The long list of type of Aloe has been moved to the bottom of the page, and the real information closer to the top. SuperTycoon 16:48, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Restructuring

message: The statement that aloe is genotoxic isn't supported by the citation: http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/DSH/aloe.html
That citation cites another article on pubmed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=9020301&dopt=Abstract
The abstract states "results from some of the studies suggest that components of senna products, particularly emodin and aloe-emodin, have genotoxic activity."
A better citation would be: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=10434060&itool=iconabstr&query_hl=3&itool=pubmed_docsum
stating that there is a good chance that anthraquinones are genotoxic and mutagenic.
Citing the citations in the citation?
I don't have access to the pubmed articles, but someone who does could rewrite it.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=10829589&query_hl=5&itool=pubmed_docsum
is another citation, using aloe vera hydrogel in the treatment of mouth ulcers.
Mucilage is known to be in aloe, and known to be a soothing compound.  Probably marshmallow and plantain (plantago major) would be a less controversial treatment (and cheaper.)
People love aloe though.  I've stopped using it.
Some doctor in Arizona did an online article about using aloe vera gel in the eyes as a treatment.  That may have sparked the craze for aloe vera eye treatments.  He was careful to specify using just the gel, but I can't find the article now.
The current article talks about supposed treatments, research and fads.  I suspect that someone more knowledgable could come up with a timeline and history of aloe fads, that'd be awsome!  Jeanne Rose states (Herbs and things, 1972, 1978) that aloe is poisonous used in large doses or for an extended period of time.  So the current research is nothing new to herbalist knowledge (possible genotoxicity and hematotoxicity are just flavors - taking internally is a big caution anyways.)
There's no writeup here about possible contact dermatitis resulting from exposure to the juice (not the gel) and I don't have a citation reference for that one.
The article also references cascara sagrada.  That was also known as a potentially dangerous plant to herbalists (Jeanne Rose, 1972, 1978.)
Rhodescus 18:21, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect Citation 

message: Does that mean that if I drink something containing aloe vera, I'll get diarhorrea? --Candy-Panda 08:04, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use as a laxative? 

message: In the article it says: "Systematic reviews of randomised and controlled clinical trials have provided evidence that Aloe vera has a strong medicinal effect"  and points to two references, with links.  Here are the relevant conclusions from the abstracts for those two references:
"There is no evidence from clinical trials to suggest that topical Aloe vera is effective in preventing or minimising radiation-induced skin reactions in cancer patients."
and
"The data for aloe vera gel and tea tree oil indicate that for neither is there compelling evidence of effectiveness."
In other words, the citations reach the exact opposite conclusion as the sentence in the article.  I'm going to hope the sentence was a typo and actually should have read "...clinical trials have provided no evidence..."  since that's what the linked references clearly state.  If it was not a typo, that's a very bad abuse of those references. Emeraldemon (talk) 19:03, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect citation part 2 

message: Who cares that aloe was featured on a post stamp? Proski (talk) 16:15, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Useless trivia 

message: What i know about Aloe Vera it's used both internally and externally on humans,and is claimed to have medicinal effects.The gel in the leaves can be made into a smooth type of cream that can heal burns such as sunburns.They can also be made into types of specail soaps.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.31.193.5 (talk) 15:09, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aloe Vera 

message: I have eaten a pie of this also there is a asian drink with aloe and lemon and tastes great! 92.81.163.41 (talk) 10:10, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  aloe as food 

message: Wasn't Aloe Vera banned in the UK at one time?  I'm curious as to what code that was so a reference can be added before making this claim.  75.70.89.124 (talk) 01:01, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Illegal? 

message: Why, in the infobox, do many species have a small ×? Does this mean "cross species" or something? Is there a reference or location where this is explained to someone not very familiar with botany? - Paul2520 (talk) 22:41, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: yes, it means that it's a cross or hybrid between other species. See Hybrid name, although it's not a very good article yet. Peter coxhead (talk) 14:52, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you for answering my question so quickly! - Paul2520 (talk) 02:01, 20 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  why small × in many species names? 

message: What is Boucerosiaa? Has this change been discussed by editors? Darorcilmir (talk) 09:50, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: What on earth is going on here?