Talk:Labrador tea

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Food and Drink task list:

To edit this page, select here

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:

Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt
Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar
Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish
Participate in project-related deletion discussions.
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food
Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section

Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

Plants Mid‑importance

	Plants portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Pharmacology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comments[edit]

There is an article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labrador_Tea which ought to be combined with this one .../wiki/Labrador_tea. Tea versus tea regford 21:41, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would anyone know if Ledum spp. has been tested for caffeine, theophylline, other stimulants etc? regford 19:28, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Labrador Tea should be kept as it's own page. It should not be merged with Ledum. deanshan 11:52, 21 February 2006 (AKST)

Why so? They are the same thing. Two pages using different names for the same thing should generally be merged. - MPF 21:09, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree 60% that it should have its own page because its use as a tea is of interest to herbalists and folks like us that drink it and want to know that aspect and not really much about taxonomy and its place in the Rhododenron family. However, I vote 40% for having one page because I actually do find the taxonomy interesting; also both articles are small, and while I want to cheer when Wpedia hits 1,000,000 (where's the party??!!!), I think small articles should often be glued together in one bag until the contents are overstuffed. I want to see 1MM of real articles. Wpedia says 'be bold' but in this one case, I will restrain myself, Respectfully submittedregford 20:30, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, we may wish to be guided by the precedent of the article on Tea itself!!! Although we may rebel against precedent if the cause be just and needful...... regford 20:36, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly regford, the uses are more important then the taxonomy for most users looking for information about the tea. I'll admit that the page could use some more information. I will put up a picture this summer (the Ledum is buried under snow at the moment). Deanshan 02:23, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, things seem ok now, not cluttered or redundant, and hyperlinked. Now, just for curiosity: much of animal DNA is non-coding. But what of plant DNA, esp in Rhododendrons. I just dunno. It's nice that the protein-expressing DNA connects Rhod. and Ledum spp. But what if it's shown later (I am just guessing) that the non-coding stuff is not so closely related. Ledum doesn't look so much like my azaleas, and tastes quite different. I think in the end maybe the taxonomy guys are going to need one massive disambiguation page. Large areas of biology that I studied as a kid have been rewritten. It was well-established that adult nerve cells never ever ever divided. And who remembers Diplococcus pneumoniae, which had to be renamed, to no great benefit. This constant renaming makes old texts sometimes unreadable. But some old texts are great work and should 'immuned' from 'novoambiguation.' There- two new words for Wikipedians!!! regford 04:09, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging[edit]

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 11:38, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Propagation[edit]

How does this plant propagate in nature? What are the best ways for people to propagate it? -71.174.182.31 (talk) 01:48, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Psychic properties[edit]

I was surprised that this article does not mention its use as a drug. When I was younger we made tea of it and it made us relaxed and kind of high. The article mentions that it contains a poison which can lead to paralysis if you consume too much but in moderate amounts it is used as a drug, similar to common tea, mate in Latin America, coffee, etc.. I don't know much about the overall health effects of drinking Labrador tea, but it probably has both negative and positive effects.

I found at http://www.drugs.com/npp/labrador-tea.html

Toxicology

Labrador tea has narcotic properties. Evidence suggests that excessive use of the tea may cause delirium or poisoning. 3 Toxic terpenes of the essential oils cause symptoms of intoxication, such as slow pulse, lowering of blood pressure, lack of coordination, convulsions, paralysis, and death. 6 It is apparently safe in a weak tea solution, but should not be made too strong. 1 , 7 I am adding it to the article. Roger491127 (talk) 16:00, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]