Talk:Prebiotic (nutrition)

message: Sometimes prebiotics and Dietary fiber are treated as the same. e.g. [It's the fiber, stupid! gives this impression. The article needs clarification. (Or, if the two terms are identical or very closely related, the articles should be merged.) --Singkong2005 02:26, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Fibre and prebiotics are totally different, so there is no reason to merge them.Knorrepoes 06:48, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dietary fiber? 

message: "Typical dietary sources of prebiotics are Jerusalem artichokes, which contain inulin, raw oats, and unrefined wheat or barley."
I have eaten many Jerusalem artichokes, and none of them contained any cereals whatsoever. In fact, it's a tuber, and thus contains nothing except Jerusalem artichoke.
I think this is an "Eats, shoots and leaves" issue. Thus, I'll change it to:
"Typical dietary sources of prebiotics are Jerusalem artichokes (which contain inulin), raw oats, unrefined wheat and unrefined barley."
Any objections? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.86.138.193 (talk) 23:40, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ingredients of a Jerusalem artichoke? 

message: Unless something has changed recently, most mammals should fement shorter chain carbohydrates in the *right* colon, and longer chain carbs in the *left* colon because of the normal flow (the small intestine leads to the cecum and the right or ascending colon, and the left colon leads to the sigmoid colon then the rectum and finally the anus.
I've changed the 'left' and 'right' designations of the article respectively.
DocKrin (talk) 16:18, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  right vs left colon 

message: Moved from article :
Again, one may wish to recall that Roberfroid, whom many consider the pre-eminent authority on prebioticsRoberfroid profile, states that only two specific fructooligosaccharides - oligofructose and inulin - meet his seminal definition of "Prebiotic."
Roberfoid is not the only one who works on probiotics, many research groups world-wide so do. However, he has been very often used as a consultant for Orafti, which makens.... fructo-oligosaccharides. Considering this, he is seen by many as the spokesperson of this industry, which can be seen by his single-minded promotion of fructo-oligosaccharides. If he wants to do so, fine by me, but that means that his remarks should not be placed so prominently in the articl.Knorrepoes (talk) 11:32, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Roberfoid

message: I revised the introductory paragraph to indicate the intermediate position prebiotics occupy between foods and drugs, and therefore the typically intermediate level of scrutiny they receive of the health claims made concerning them.  In a subsequent paragraph, I condensed the previous discussion (which I thought was too detailed for this article) of whether galactose oligosaccharides should be considered prebiotics, merely noting that disagreement exists about this and linking to the galactose oligosaccharide article.CharlesHBennett (talk) 04:15, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intermediate position between food and drug, and intermediate regulatory scrutiny of health claims 

message: By virtue of the tables showing mostly values for raw foods the article gives the misleading (as far as my understanding goes) impression that these foods need to be eaten raw to gain prebiotic benefits. Can somebody correct this please? 88.108.215.10 (talk) 11:04, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Raw /cooked 

message: In the first sentence, the phrase "commensal microorganisms...contribute to the well-being of their host" is oxymoronic or self-contradictory. By definition, commensals neither help nor harm their hosts. If we derive benefit from the microorganisms that derive benefit from living in our gut, then both benefit. That's mutualism, no? 204.27.58.34 (talk) 23:14, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I hope that I do this correctly. This is the first time I've added to a discussion on wikipedia. Whether the author was implying that the human host did not benefit or that the microorganism did not benefit, it seems to me that either is incorrect and that the true relationship is one of mutualism. Both the human host and the microorganism benefit. Crgrove (talk) 17:26, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for confirming. I removed the word "commensal". I didn't replace it with "mutualistic" or something similar because the remaining phrase is clearly self-defining as is: "microorganisms (e.g., bacteria and fungi) that contribute to the well-being of their host." 108.60.216.202 (talk) 04:06, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commensalism versus Mutualism 

message: *search : Marcel-Roberfroid|Marcel-B-Roberfroid|Roberfroid-Marcel|Roberfroid-M|Roberfroid-M-B Louvain-University|University-of-Louvain|Université-Catholique-de-Louvain|Louvain-la-Neuve
*Publication de recherche (Détail) de Roberfroid Marcel
Xb2u7Zjzc32 (talk) 23:50, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Marcel Roberfroid Publications

message: The following appears to me to be [{WP:OR]] - I looked and didn't find a review discussing this.
Researchers now also focus on the distinction between short-chain, long-chain, and full-spectrum prebiotics. "Short-chain" prebiotics, e.g., oligofructose, contain 2–8 links per saccharide molecule and are typically fermented more quickly in the ascending colon of the colon providing nourishment to the bacteria in that area. Longer-chain prebiotics, e.g., inulin, contain 9-64 links per saccharide molecule, and tend to be fermented more slowly, nourishing bacteria predominantly in the descending colon. Full-spectrum prebiotics provide the full range of molecular link-lengths from 2-64 links per molecule, and nourish bacteria throughout the colon, e.g., Oligofructose-Enriched Inulin (OEI). The majority of research done on prebiotics is based on full-spectrum prebiotics, typically using OEI as the research substance.
-- Jytdog (talk) 23:49, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:OR]] 

message: There is a relatively new area of research on substances consumed orally, not absorbed by the consumer (human or other), NOT serving as an energy source for bacteria residing in the large intestine, yet having an impact on the microbiome. Flavonoids (subset of polyphenols) fall into this consideration - poorly to very poorly absorbed, yet thought to change the microbiome and have systemic effects on health of the microbiome's host. In my opinion there are not yet sufficient good secondary source references exploring this theory, and no gov't or non-gov't position papers expanding the definition of 'prebiotic,' so it's sort of a watch-for-future-development situation. This review explores the question: Dueñas M, Muñoz-González I, et al. A survey of modulation of gut microbiota by dietary polyphenols. Biomed Res Int. 2015;2015:850902. doi: 10.1155/2015/850902. Epub 2015 Feb 22. Review. PubMed PMID: 25793210. A second theory is that polyphenols reach the large intestine unabsorbed, are then partially metabolized by resident bacteria and subsequently absorbed across the large intestine. IMO, a reach, but there is lit on that, too. David notMD (talk) 15:29, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  The presumed positive influence of polyphenols on prebiotic functions is one of those research areas frustrated by the ability to actually measure polyphenol fate and effects in vivo, something that is years or decades away from succeeding. Yet the article you cite and others like this propel the conjecture. Two companies that have been proposing mechanisms and products based on this thin science are here and here. Both are many years in development without commercial validation, impact or sales as of 2017. --Zefr (talk) 17:16, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, and am not recommending that any Wikipedia article try to encompass rapidly evolving research. David notMD (talk) 18:31, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non-fiber prebiotics 

message: Hi all, as a class assignment, I will be editing this page by adding citations, updating definitions and function of prebiotics and possibly highlighting additional research that has been conducted in this area. Zyxcba123 (talk) 15:06, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: New Edits

message: IP 74.62.10.2 the content you  added here and here and here is unsourced.  We also don't discuss dose  per WP:MEDMOS which in turn is based on WP:NOTHOWTO. Please discuss before continuing to try to add this. Thanks Jytdog (talk) 15:51, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dose, sourcing