Talk:Lingzhi (mushroom)

Also known as Reishi

Most people in western countries who buy this mushroom supplement buy bottles with label "Reishi", not "Lingzhi".

So Reishi should be mentioned in the beginning of this Wikipedia article?

--ee1518 (talk) 10:30, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

Insufficient evidence for medical claims

This edit was reverted because there is no reputable review(s) to indicate any certain medicinal benefit of lingzhi (reishi) mushrooms, while there are reviews to the contrary, such as this one, i.e., the research on reishi is unconvincing to treat or lower the risk of cancer, metabolic disorders or cardiovascular diseases. BerkshireT prefers to edit war rather than consider the weight of evidence against stating supposed benefits in the lede. This statement by BershireT: "its use in the treatment of disease is supported by numerous modern peer reviewed studies" requires a WP:MEDRS review, which doesn't exist. This edit restores reviews to the lede, and presents clearly the WP:MEDRS evidence on the status of clinical research. If changes are made, they have to be supported by adequate published evidence meeting MEDRS. Zefr (talk) 23:00, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Appropriate and inappropriate claims

I came to this page, actually, looking for botanical information about this plant. However, including in an encyclopedia article the fact that it's used in medicine is entirely appropriate. What is not appropriate is including a dismissive statement as to it's medicinal worth. This is not only false (I could refer you to scores of competent studies that attest to its usefulness, The editor Zefr is being strategically reductive in the sources used), or at the very least, highly controversial, but it is simply not necessary, and it indicates strongly that the person doing the editing came with an agenda to be dismissive or denigrating of medical systems that compete with conventional medicine. I have, in fact, never seen a Wikipedia page about a medicinal plant that did not contain a dismissive statement. .

It is only necessary in an encyclopedia article about a medicinal plant to state that it is a medicinal plant in whatever medical milieus it might be associated with, and to refrain from either dismissive judgements or promotional-sounding judgements, because to do otherwise is to invite an unresolvable controversy.

In the future, when I see a dismissive statement about a well-established medicinal plant, I will delete the dismissive statement and not substitute a positive statement in its stead. This is an entirely reasonable compromise. BerkshireT (talk) 23:33, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Read the second Wikipedia pillar, which is based on WP:V. I rewrote the lede (discussed above) to say "there is insufficient evidence..." to claim that this is a "medicinal" mushroom because there are no WP:MEDRS reviews to verify and say otherwise. Sporadic lab research, published mainly in unreliable alternative medicine journals and poorly-designed preliminary clinical research are the definition of "insufficient evidence" or unverified claims of benefit. WP:BURDEN - The burden is on BerkshireT or other editors to provide WP:V literature to support content in the article about medically-valid uses of this mushroom or its extracts. Zefr (talk) 23:46, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

-To begin with I am not a wikipedia editor and as such will not be editing this page and apologize if this is not formatted correctly here. That said this section on medicinal value is greatly lacking and biased. Zefr claims there is no evidence to support it being a medicinal mushroom ignoring the links that they provided. The link above quotes several studies showing the mushroom has effects on cancer treatment and there has been no study shown here that claims otherwise. Instead to negate that Zefr links to the Cochrane database which conducted a review that questioned other studies methodology. A questioning of methodology does not negate that those studies exist, were published and peer reviewed. According to the NIH a study is reversed when "Medical reversal occurs when a new clinical trial — superior to predecessors by virtue of better controls, design, size, or endpoints — contradicts current clinical practice". A overview questioning methodology falls far short of that kind of reversal. Even if those studies are questionable (which I admit has merit) to doubt the medical properties of the fungus ignores the other studies dealing with Hepatitis, Antiviral effects, Chronic fatigue syndrome and numerous other studies which aren't being questioned. Reading this article, it comes off as if the whole idea of medicinal value is bunk science and should be disregarded which is not what studies and the medical literature says at all. This is clearly very biased editing and should be remedied. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.123.77.195 (talk) 00:53, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

New Page?

Wondering if there should be a separate page/entry for reishi not connected to Lingzhi. Reishi not being a scientific name but a common one, it is usually used to refer to various Ganoderma sp. uses as teas, extracts and medicine. What is often used and labeled as reishi is the Ganoderma species lingzhi, lucidum, tsugae, and sometimes sinense. As the name reishi does not scientifically refer to any species and in common use can refer to several species, is it not more appropriate for it to have it's own page that deals with how these various Ganoderma species are used and then links to the individual species? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.123.77.195 (talk) 12:09, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Is the article written for falsification? Please help me figure it out.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Lingzhi_(mushroom)&oldid=1054659558#History The word lingzhi (靈芝) was first recorded in a fu (賦; "rhapsody; prose-poem") by theHan dynasty polymath Zhang Heng (CE) (Common Era) 78–139). His Xijing fu (西京賦) (Western Metropolis Rhapsody) contains a description of the 104 BCE Jianzhang Palace of Emperor Wu of Han that parallels lingzhi with shijun (石菌; "rock mushroom"): "Raising huge breakers, lifting waves, That drenched the stone mushrooms on the high bank, And soaked the magic fungus on vermeil boughs." Knechtges, David R. (1996). Wen Xuan or Selections of Refined Literature. 3. Princeton University Press. pp. 201, 211. ISBN 9780691021263. https://books.google.com/books?id=GYJi0OkKFJIC a similar link to the same book https://books.google.com./books?id=V08ABAAAQBAJ not found in the search lingzhi (靈芝) Is the article written for falsification? Please help me figure it out. --Iskatelb (talk) 12:18, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

References in popular culture

In the TV series (TV series) there is a brief sequence/couple of scenes about 'capturing' a giant mushroom from an enemy castle and then consuming the drink made from it - would this have been a lingzhi mushroom? Would this/equivalent reference to the novel be a suitable mention for the article? Jackiespeel (talk) 10:19, 11 June 2022 (UTC)