Ginkgo Biloba Debunked?

[voidisyinyang]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/journalists/kat...te-of-time.html

 

A 6 year study comparing the Chinese herb with a fake supplement found no difference in memory abilities for the elderly.

[enouch]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/journalists/kat...te-of-time.html

 

A 6 year study comparing the Chinese herb with a fake supplement found no difference in memory abilities for the elderly.

 

 

 

It's been debunked and proven so many times it almost isn't worth talking about. Most people don't take it in the required dosage anyway-160-240 m.g. Check on studies around the world!

[voidisyinyang]

ah -- thanks.

 

It's been debunked and proven so many times it almost isn't worth talking about. Most people don't take it in the required dosage anyway-160-240 m.g. Check on studies around the world!

[enouch]

ah -- thanks.

 

 

Sorry if I sounded too strong or rude!

[voidisyinyang]

Nope. I just checked to confirm your claim and indeed the test used these amounts:

 

The randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial included 3,069 community-dwelling participants, ages 72 to 96 years, who received a twice-daily dose of 120-mg extract of G biloba (n = 1,545) or identical-appearing placebo (n = 1,524). The study was conducted at six academic medical centers in the United States between 2000 and 2008, with a median (midpoint) follow-up of 6.1 years. Change in cognition was assessed by various tests and measures.

 

Sorry if I sounded too strong or rude!

[soaring crane]

In addition to the dosage, wouldn't the quality of the product play a tremendous role in something like this? I don't know about Ginko Balboa but I know that Johanniskraut (St. John's Wort) has been tested and found ineffective in the US and yet it was tested and found highly effective in Germany. The difference was in the product itself.

 

In Germany, you can only by these kind of supplements in pharmaceutical quality, from the pharmacy (at pharmaceutical prices, unfortunately, but at least they work). What the Americans used in their study (the study cited in the article I read) was inferior and cheap, it would not even have gotten certification in Germany. The dosage was also not close to the 600mg recommended by the German study.

 

So, apples and oranges, really. Regardless, a lot of Americans would be influenced by a flawed study, and subsequently buy into the hype that only toxic synthetic medications are effective in treating their problems (which I have no trouble believing was the real motivation behind the US study anyway).

 

So, maybe Ginko Balboa is not necessarily Ginko Balboa.

[Walker]

In addition to the dosage, wouldn't the quality of the product play a tremendous role in something like this? I don't know about Ginko Balboa but I know that Johanniskraut (St. John's Wort) has been tested and found ineffective in the US and yet it was tested and found highly effective in Germany. The difference was in the product itself.

 

So, maybe Ginko Balboa is not necessarily Ginko Balboa.

 

What you mention is certainly a factor in the minds of many Chinese doctors (especially those of more traditional mindsets), who I have heard say that the best herbal medicines grow in natural surroundings on old plants in their native ecosystems, far from human habitation and pollution, and so forth. They are also often best taken shortly after being picked and are more effective if you eat them near their source rather than after they have traveled around the globe. Conversely, modern herbal medicines grown in monocultural farms far from the source of seeds and close to human settlements, later to be picked and processed with the aid of machines, before being packed into plastic wrapping and turned into globe-trotting freight exposed to all sorts of changes in temperature, altitude, and qi fields over long periods of time... Put simply, such herbs lack a lot of the qi needed to heal disease. Or so I hear.

 

Another important consideration: how was gingko biloba used in China historically? As a supplement taken as those in the study took it? Or as part of a classical herbal prescription, to be adjusted regularaly by a doctor as well as augmented by numerous other herbs in the prescription as well as perhaps acupuncture, lifestyle and diet advice, etc. If the latter is the case, then add to the question the fact that the qi of the doctor must be taken into account and you are faced with an impossible-to-design experiment. No experiment can realistically address them. Knowing what to make of these studies also becomes a difficult task! Probably why many Chinese trust koubei--a good word-of-mouth reputation--more than anything else when looking for doctors and meds.

[VCraigP]

I used to regularly take GB years ago.

 

I always noticed the effect. There was definitely a mental energy boost for me.

Also I noticed after extended use that I would get a feeling of over use similar to caffeine over use. A feeling that Gingko was the flame and that the fuel was used up to some extent.

 

Studies have shown that it increases blood flow to the brain, and peripheral circulation.

 

Quality product in sufficient dose will have an effect IMO.

 

I also agree that there is a great deal of pushback (propaganda) anytime something "natural" and unpatentable comes along which would compete with pharma products.

 

Also I am not sure GB is a good solution for advanced geriatric issues. However it may well be very good for younger people to aid in mental acuity. and maybe just maybe long term use of the product could prevent or reduce symptoms of aging relating to cognition. I doubt such a long term study has been or will be done.

 

For younger people with mental fatigue or need for greater mental energy I would highly recommend it. The difficult thing for me is that I almost always can tell when I have taken any herb and can perceive it's effects. Most people tend to be more "dense" than that and so need reassurance that these things have an effect.

 

Hey, maybe I have a really highly developed placebo response.

 

Useful??

 

Craig

[Maddie]

In addition to the dosage, wouldn't the quality of the product play a tremendous role in something like this? I don't know about Ginko Balboa but I know that Johanniskraut (St. John's Wort) has been tested and found ineffective in the US and yet it was tested and found highly effective in Germany. The difference was in the product itself.

 

In Germany, you can only by these kind of supplements in pharmaceutical quality, from the pharmacy (at pharmaceutical prices, unfortunately, but at least they work). What the Americans used in their study (the study cited in the article I read) was inferior and cheap, it would not even have gotten certification in Germany. The dosage was also not close to the 600mg recommended by the German study.

 

So, apples and oranges, really. Regardless, a lot of Americans would be influenced by a flawed study, and subsequently buy into the hype that only toxic synthetic medications are effective in treating their problems (which I have no trouble believing was the real motivation behind the US study anyway).

 

So, maybe Ginko Balboa is not necessarily Ginko Balboa.

 

I used to suffer from sever depression. I had tried St. John's Wort in the doseage recommended on the bottle and did not really feel much better. Then a friend of mine told me that you had to take quite a bit more than the bottle indicated to get results. So I did, I took a lot more than the bottle indicated and then I got really good results

[Taomeow]

Guys, some of you may be missing the point. If you don't know who paid for the study, you can't really take it seriously no matter what it "proves." If it is a pharmaceutical company or its agents, the very purpose of the study is to disprove a natural thing under investigation, and only "scientists" who will oblige will be getting the job. Only herbs that might successfully compete with pharmaceutical drugs due to publicity they got, and therefore pose a threat to pharmaceutical profits, are subjected to such "investigations."

 

It's always this simple.

[johndoe2012]

Sorry to derail this thread:

Save herbal medicine. The legislation in EU was probably lobbied by pharmaceutical companies.

 

I am a chemical engineer myself and think this stinks. Even in so-called socialist Europe the money is calling the shots.

[TheWhiteRabbit]

People get angry about this but Ginko Biloba is dangerous and not meant for long term use.

 

Pharmacology of Chinese Herbs states that several months use can lead to a weakening of brain arteries resulting in aneurysm, stroke or brain hemmorraging.

 

Ive been saying this for a long time people. I know people who have had brain damage from misusing this herb by taking it all the time, or taking it sporadically long term.

Edited August 30, 2010 by TheWhiteRabbit

[mYTHmAKER]

People get angry about this but Ginko Biloba is dangerous and not meant for long term use.

 

Pharmacology of Chinese Herbs states that several months use can lead to a weakening of brain arteries resulting in aneurysm, stroke or brain hemmorraging.

 

Ive been saying this for a long time people. I know people who have had brain damage from misusing this herb by taking it all the time, or taking it sporadically long term.

 

Does it say what dosage

My eye doctor has us taking 60 mg a day to improve circulation to the eyes

Anyone else taking Ginko for this purpose?

[Encephalon]

When my wife went on Paxil about 6 years ago she found it very difficult to climax. With Gingko, we were back in business. So, nay to memory, yay to circulatory issues in the erectile tissues. Hey, that rhymes!

[Mokona]

So it either doesn't work at all - causes brain damage - or increases orgasms? What the hell?

 

Lol - I don't know which article or word to take anymore.

[Taomeow]

I know people who have had brain damage from misusing this herb by taking it all the time, or taking it sporadically long term.

 

Could you please provide their names? Would I be able to contact them and find out exactly what happened and what else they were taking besides ginkgo biloba?

 

Chinese herbs, with very few exceptions, are not used as single-herb "supplements" in TCM, and haven't been used like that for thousands of years. In a multiherbal formula used traditionally and prescribed individually, possible negative effects of any single herb are counteracted, neutralized, enhanced or balanced depending on the effect and the needs of the patient. To take them a la patented pharmaceuticals -- one at a time for a particular symptom, illness, or desired effect (while ignoring all other effects or knowing nothing about them) is a new, and vastly inferior, way to use them.

 

The TCM way does not allow for "side effects." All effects are effects. If some effects of an herb are different from the ones aimed at, other herbs are added to block the unwanted effect. The Western way is to prescribe the next medication for the symptom caused by a medication, but the new medication has its own damaging effects, so a new one is added, ad nauseam. They never synergize, never balance each other, never harmonize in the formula, let alone in the body. But a TCM herbal formula is put together exactly for the purpose of balancing out all effects of all ingredients. And as soon as effects show up that were not intended, something can always be added, subtracted or changed on an individual basis. You can't benefit from any one single herb "supplement" through "pharmacology of Chinese herbs" and you can't really get any real information about its action when it is lab-dissected into "active ingredients" the Western way instead of being synergistically combined with dozens of other ingredients that will change its "pharmacology" in such complex ways as to be inaccessible to double-blind placebo-controlled pharma-financed studies.

 

To summarize, "pharmacology of Chinese herbs" is yet another "advanced science of slicing soup."

[TheWhiteRabbit]

Could you please provide their names? Would I be able to contact them and find out exactly what happened and what else they were taking besides ginkgo biloba?

 

Chinese herbs, with very few exceptions, are not used as single-herb "supplements" in TCM, and haven't been used like that for thousands of years. In a multiherbal formula used traditionally and prescribed individually, possible negative effects of any single herb are counteracted, neutralized, enhanced or balanced depending on the effect and the needs of the patient. To take them a la patented pharmaceuticals -- one at a time for a particular symptom, illness, or desired effect (while ignoring all other effects or knowing nothing about them) is a new, and vastly inferior, way to use them.

 

The TCM way does not allow for "side effects." All effects are effects. If some effects of an herb are different from the ones aimed at, other herbs are added to block the unwanted effect. The Western way is to prescribe the next medication for the symptom caused by a medication, but the new medication has its own damaging effects, so a new one is added, ad nauseam. They never synergize, never balance each other, never harmonize in the formula, let alone in the body. But a TCM herbal formula is put together exactly for the purpose of balancing out all effects of all ingredients. And as soon as effects show up that were not intended, something can always be added, subtracted or changed on an individual basis. You can't benefit from any one single herb "supplement" through "pharmacology of Chinese herbs" and you can't really get any real information about its action when it is lab-dissected into "active ingredients" the Western way instead of being synergistically combined with dozens of other ingredients that will change its "pharmacology" in such complex ways as to be inaccessible to double-blind placebo-controlled pharma-financed studies.

 

To summarize, "pharmacology of Chinese herbs" is yet another "advanced science of slicing soup."

 

It was a personal friend. Now, I dont think he wants his personal information drifting on the internet. Besides it he was taking vitamins.

 

In situations where formulas are involved that is usually the case. If you are taking an actual TCM formula that contains Ginko Biloba then it is soup we are speaking of. Pharmacology of Chinese herbs breaks down the herbs by their components, not the components of formulas.

 

It seems inappropriate to discredit something because it is not understood. Such behaviour could be likened to saying particle accelerators and particle physicists are useless because they dont take into considerstion the synergy of atoms and molecules. Or that Radio Frequency electronics are worthless because they create unneeded Radio frequency pollution. The study of Chinese Herb Pharmacology tells us a lot about herbs, their toxicity and the appropriate does that are effective. It even tells us things we would not have otherwise known about these herbs.

 

It reminds me a time back when an uncle said they liked a specific cartoon. I thought it was dorky. Later on I decided I liked it but somehow I was unable to find copies of it anymore.

 

As for personal information, the Mak thing left a bad taste in my mouth. Who knew that someone had the balls to call up people I had learned from and obnoxiously yell at them. So no personal information. Sorry to disappoint.

Edited August 30, 2010 by TheWhiteRabbit

[Taomeow]

It was a personal friend. Now, I dont think he wants his personal information drifting on the internet. Besides it he was taking vitamins.

 

In situations where formulas are involved that is usually the case. If you are taking an actual TCM formula that contains Ginko Biloba then it is soup we are speaking of. Pharmacology of Chinese herbs breaks down the herbs by their components, not the components of formulas.

 

It seems inappropriate to discredit something because it is not understood. Such behaviour could be likened to saying particle accelerators and particle physicists are useless because they dont take into considerstion the synergy of atoms and molecules. Or that Radio Frequency electronics are worthless because they create unneeded Radio frequency pollution. The study of Chinese Herb Pharmacology tells us a lot about herbs, their toxicity and the appropriate does that are effective. It even tells us things we would not have otherwise known about these herbs.

 

It reminds me a time back when an uncle said they liked a specific cartoon. I thought it was dorky. Later on I decided I liked it but somehow I was unable to find copies of it anymore.

 

As for personal information, the Mak thing left a bad taste in my mouth. Who knew that someone had the balls to call up people I had learned from and obnoxiously yell at them. So no personal information. Sorry to disappoint.

 

Fair enough. Would you mind giving your friend MY personal email then? I will PM you?..

 

So it's not "people" anymore anyway, it's one person. And I have your word for it and no other info. Really not enough to go on, truly, verily. I also have a personal friend, in another country where the power layout was such that herbs were not exterminated from what MDs learn in school. My friend has MS. An MD prescribed ginkgo biloba and it helped her get out of a very nasty flare-up which landed her in the hospital for months, and get into a remission with no symptoms. Of course you only have my word for it. Sucks, right?..

 

Oh, and I wasn't saying the complexities of TCM herbal formulas aren't understood by anyone. They aren't understood in the framework of a paradigm that studies them without having any understanding, regard or respect for the paradigm that created them, a different one. You can't understand "kakim tebya bezdarnym banal'nostiam nauchili v shkole" without knowing the paradigm it is part of, and if you apply the one you know you will come to the conclusion that it's unintelligeble gibberish and publish this result in a peer-reviewed journal. But anyone here who knows the paradigm the above comes from will just laugh.

 

As TCM pros who are trained in the true tradition and not in McDonalds-TCM blend will laugh at "pharmacology of Chinese herbs." It wasn't pharmacists who discovered and learned to use these herbs, you know. And it wasn't an inferior kind of medicine that created a civilization that failed to disappear off the face of the earth unlike all of its contemporaries, and generated the largest population on Earth. Tells you something about what it can do for human health long term. Our pharmaceuticals are taken off the market in an average of 15 years -- just enough time for lawsuits to accumulate to a point where they start making little but annoying dents in profits. That's when a new drug is introduced. Study the history of medicine. 3/4 of all drugs approved by FDA in the past 40 years have already been taken off the market...

[VCraigP]

And another finer point about Gingko TCM vs Gingko western standardized extract.

 

TCM DOES include Ginkgo Biloba in it. it is not a major item in the chinese apothecary.

 

 

I have no clue what White Rabbit is referring to here, what form was used in the study, and I concur with Taemeow here in that a single herb studied by itself is NOT TCM at all.

 

Ginkgo biloba extract 24% ginko flavone glycosides, 6% terpene lactones, is the standard established originally by GERMAN Pharma companies who sought to take many herbs and use them as Pharma drugs. These items like gingko are considered as Drugs in Germany and elsewhere. There is hard science behind them (of course we could further dissect the value of "hard science" here but that's a tangent).

 

My main point is that ginkgo as a standardized extract is what has been examined and is widely used. If you aren't talking about the standardized extract you are talking about something else entirely.

 

TCM doesn't even consider Gingko for the same purposes as the "western" EXTRACT.

 

Now I also agree about the problem of discussing Chinese herbs using western pharmacological models.

I will go further to point out some text from the summary of the book mentioned and comment further;

 

However, the use of herbs as an alternative medical treatment for many illnesses has increased steadily over the last decade, particularly since such herbs are categorized as "Natural Food Products" and are not yet subject to strict control by the FDA.

 

This language speaks very LOUDLY to me. Especially the "not YET subject to control by the FDA. TPTB want to control or remove natural products from the market place. The FDA is Big Pharma's tool. The language here sounds very clearly to be the typical conservative whiny big brother language stridently saying they need to CONTROL this stuff. People cant be trused to make decisions about their health. This is dangerous stuff to be left to the "experts".

 

We are blessed that so far in the US "Natural Food Products" are not subject to control by the FDA. But the FDA is not taking this lying down. They and their cronys are fighting this hard fought status quo tooth and nail since its inception. The DSHEA act was passed in response to the overreaching FDA who continues to try to shut down alternative and complemantary therapies, especially effective ones.

 

My conclusion is that the aim of such a tome is to apply the Pharma model to all chinese herbs and eventually take them under control so they are subject to control as DRUGS and made much harder and more expensive to access. If the FDA could do that tomorrow, trust me, they would.

 

end rant

 

PS - White Rabbit may not be an actual propagandist but seems to be at least an accidental one to me.

 

 

Craig

Edited August 31, 2010 by VCraigP

[Mal]

[宁]

"pharmacology of Chinese herbs."

 

That's a really HUGE field. I just stuck my nose into it recently, and came up with a problem... couldn't find any coherent refference regarding the intake of TCM mixtures with regard to internal and external cycles. In fact, I'm not even sure that the information has passed from oral to written form.

 

IMO, 'debunking' is a term loaded with an agenda.

[Taomeow]

That's a really HUGE field. I just stuck my nose into it recently, and came up with a problem... couldn't find any coherent refference regarding the intake of TCM mixtures with regard to internal and external cycles. In fact, I'm not even sure that the information has passed from oral to written form.

 

IMO, 'debunking' is a term loaded with an agenda.

 

Oh, there's a lot of recorded information, the field of TCM's expertise in this regard is huge but "pharmacology" can't address it at all because it all starts with the cycles of growth, maturation, timing of gathering, cycles of preparation, etc., of the herbs themselves. This is an alchemical field, really. (I said it before and I will say it again -- I do not make any distinctions between "internal" and "external" alchemy, and believe those who do have been misinformed. The two kinds of alchemy are not "internal" vs. "external" but rather "successful" vs. "nice try.")

 

Also, it is helpful (and f... realistic, unlike what biomechanical fundamentalist were indoctrinated to believe) to think of herbs as sentient beings, and quite erroneous to ignore this aspect of their overall makeup -- innate and acquired intelligence. E.g., just like humans in charge of fairly simple tasks, herbs that are very simple and straightforward in their action don't need a long time to learn, mature and get competent -- you can make Chinese chrysanthemum tea out of this year's flowers, and it will do some simple things it knows how to do, for instance smooth out Liver Qi, dispel some heat, heal some irritations, strengthen some capillaries, stuff like that.

 

Not so with ginseng, one of the true sages... It matures and learns at about the pace of a human being, but then if it isn't discovered and dug up it keeps living way past the human age -- hundreds of years... gaining wisdom all the while. So if you're going to use ginseng that's under 6 years old, you're basically dealing with a child... a whiz, but still a child. A 20+ year old ginseng has a Ph.D.. in several life sciences.

 

And a 60-year-old one (for which people in the know and in the money will pay way more than its weight in gold) has a cosmic consciousness comparable to that of a whole planet. It knows what to do not just for your body, mind and spirit, but for your afterlife too. A 20-year-old ginseng will lower your blood pressure if it's too high and raise it if it's too low -- same root, same preparation, two different people will take the same dose and it will do for one the exact opposite of what it will do for the other, except in both cases it will happen to be exactly what they respectively need. I'd like to see a pharma employee put this in his pipe and smoke... er... blow it. And then a 60-year-old ginseng will in all likelihood direct you toward the spiritual practice, lifestyle changes, or other destiny-affecting decisions whose implications reach far beyond this lifetime of yours. I'd like to see a double-blind placebo-controlled pharma-financed study investigating this effect...

[TheWhiteRabbit]

Fair enough. Would you mind giving your friend MY personal email then? I will PM you?..

 

I called him a few hours ago. He response was "are you drunk?".

I explained I had some things I had to get off my chest and started to talk, and suprisingly it went well seeing as we had a falling out about 10 years ago. You see I was a minister at the time and I was telling people what they were doing wrong.

(starting to begin to notice a pronounced pattern in my life). So of course they tried to get rid of me and me and my extended family lost whatever left over vistages of christianity we ever believed in.

But we had a good time talking, glad I did it. He didnt want to talk about the ginko thing it took him a while to get back to where he is now. He didnt want someone he didnt know out of the blue contacting him to confirm what I said.

I guess the only good thing I got out of it was reconcilliation and releasing some long held hostilities. It felt good to show compassion to someone who had it in for me only to find that they were somewhat receptive to it. Isnt it time?

 

My conclusion is that the aim of such a tome is to apply the Pharma model to all chinese herbs and eventually take them under control so they are subject to control as DRUGS and made much harder and more expensive to access. If the FDA could do that tomorrow, trust me, they would.

 

end rant

 

PS - White Rabbit may not be an actual propagandist but seems to be at least an accidental one to me.

 

 

Craig

 

I know its possible implications. It was however written at a Kentucky University using information from studies abroad in China for the majority of the time. So although the term pharmacology was used in the title, the work is based upon chinese studies where western and eastern medicine is combined. So there is no focus on only using the pharmacological derivatives only in TCM treatment with these herbs found in the book.

 

There is a lot of fear surrounding the FDA and banning herbs and most of it is well founded. They are funded by drug companies. These drug companies have enough money to have lobbyists decend upon captiol hill when congress decides to vote on something that interferes with the drug company's well being. Businesses are like that and always will be like that. However there is some occlusion in the nature that herbs are very hard to categorize and ban. This is why herbal formulas cannot be patented in the states. They so easily occur naturally and can be mixed almost as easily. Drug companies know this is a weakness, and now seek to do something even more strange: attempt to ban plant species not indigenous to the states from being planted on american soil. (The "White List") What about aunt ethel now who cant plant her flowers in the spring anymore? Thats how desperate they are.

 

 

Oh, there's a lot of recorded information, the field of TCM's expertise in this regard is huge but "pharmacology" can't address it at all because it all starts with the cycles of growth, maturation, timing of gathering, cycles of preparation, etc., of the herbs themselves. This is an alchemical field, really. (I said it before and I will say it again -- I do not make any distinctions between "internal" and "external" alchemy, and believe those who do have been misinformed. The two kinds of alchemy are not "internal" vs. "external" but rather "successful" vs. "nice try.")

That is true, but there are some useful things in the book. It is useful in understanding somethings about individual herbs not found in the materia medica.

Perhaps just try to take a look at it rather than judge on the spot?

 

 

And a 60-year-old one (for which people in the know and in the money will pay way more than its weight in gold) has a cosmic consciousness comparable to that of a whole planet. It knows what to do not just for your body, mind and spirit, but for your afterlife too. A 20-year-old ginseng will lower your blood pressure if it's too high and raise it if it's too low -- same root, same preparation, two different people will take the same dose and it will do for one the exact opposite of what it will do for the other, except in both cases it will happen to be exactly what they respectively need. I'd like to see a pharma employee put this in his pipe and smoke... er... blow it. And then a 60-year-old ginseng will in all likelihood direct you toward the spiritual practice, lifestyle changes, or other destiny-affecting decisions whose implications reach far beyond this lifetime of yours. I'd like to see a double-blind placebo-controlled pharma-financed study investigating this effect...

 

Kudos. That is what I was going to get to. Even with drugs there are effects that occur from person to person. Most of the time it is a mystery to science about the side effects of an her or a drug and why. Even though the book does present a lot of crude information that is useful, nothing speaks to the tried and true patterns that one can see in nature. Patterns that scientists are not (meant?) to see.

 

So I have been agreeing with you, it is just useful to understand some things about these herbs. Like did you know that Ginseng increases the supply of oxygen to all body tissues, especially smooth muscle tissue? (smooth muscle tissue is found in the heart).

---

 

Other than that, I have great respect for the Ginko Tree and others should respect it too. It is rare, and in fact its other species are now extinct. It is the only species of its similar kind.

 

When I lived for a time in Montana... Missoula to be exact. I would go and visit this tree with fan shaped leaves that lived in the middle of he campus. I was fascinated by it and it always seemed to welcome me in a way. The fact is trees are people too, and should be honored in all the ways that humans are. If it provides something useful that is useful to some, it should still be honored.

 

In some ways I believe we all as human beings too provide a measure of assistance to other people. Just being here with our energy helps other people. Especially if you show compassion for others.

[zerostao]

just found this thread put me in the pro-ginkgo camp. there are ginkgo trees that i visit each year.(100 years + in age, the trees, not me)

i never took ginkgo as a memory aid. it also depends on if the leaf used was green or yellow when harvested becoz they give entirely different results. green is not better than yellow, and yellow is not better than green , it depends on what you are trying to adress.