Talk:Rutin
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Rutin is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project. | ||
 |
This article is also supported by WikiProject Chemistry. | ||
| Stub | This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. | ||
| Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. | ||
|
Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. |
|||
Shouldn't "It is gluten free" be removed? Because it is a chemical substance, with the formula given, this should be clear enough. Otherwise, we can add this sentence to many many other articles - with no significant use.
I have a book of ecological biochemistry in front of me, and certainly shows a completely different chemical structure of rutin. Are u sure this is correct? Googling it will also prove this. thx
[edit] Ambiguous Statement
In humans, it attaches to the iron ion Fe2+, preventing it from binding to hydrogen peroxide and creating a highly reactive free radical that may damage cells.
(I'm not a chemist) Does this mean that rutin binding with the iron ion creates a highly reactive free radical, or that it prevents the formation of a free radical?
In the first case, it might better be stated:
In humans, it attaches to the iron ion Fe2+, preventing it from binding to hydrogen peroxide, thereby creating a highly reactive free radical that may damage cells.
In the second case, it might better be stated:
In humans, it attaches to the iron ion Fe2+, preventing it from binding to hydrogen peroxide, which would otherwise create a highly reactive free radical that may damage cells.
Is the entry a piece of covert product placement or advertisment for the said Californian drink?
[edit] Systematic name
I believe the numbering of the hydroxyl groups on the chromene are wrong (should be 5,7-dixydroxy). Also the numbering of the ketone group is wrong (should be "-4-one"). Do people agree? --Kupirijo 16:43, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
