Talk:Pistachio

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Turpentine[edit]

Turpentine? Really? It says they taste like that. Don't like the nut but I'm suspecting vandalism here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.210.143.212 (talk) 05:46, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Combustion[edit]

pistachios can combust spontaneously if a large quantity is left together. Maybe give this a mention? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.184.30.134 (talk) 01:20, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Old discussions[edit]

The Pistachio Principle should be mentioned somewhere on this page... Drsruli (talk) 22:27, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Anatomically modern humans are around since the Upper Palaeolithic, that is, since about 35.000 years BP. I was certainly talking about anatomically modern humans of the late Upper Palaeolithic, but that's maybe a bit too specific for an article about Pistachios. --Yak 20:05, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Ok that is good then :). --ShaunMacPherson 17:42, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I heard somewhere that a random mutation in pistachios can cause them to contain a poisonous substance... cyanide, as I recall. Could someone elaborate on this? --LostLeviathan 08:02, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC) --- Pistachio is also the name of a package for the Debian system (pistachio-kernel), that installs the L4 kernel. But, I do not how to add an alternative meaning in WikiPedia, the right way. How should I do this? - Alexander

Done. Martin 01:33, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The worldwide production is more than 100%!!!

According to this website [1] [2] and my Trader Joe's package of Turkish Pistachios, pistachios can be naturally pinkish if stored in contact with their redish husks before roasting. It would be nice to find an authoritative source.

I've got [3], which show the corrolation between dye and aspergillus contamination. *shrugs* It was common knowledge when I worked in an Aspergillus lab that the shells were dyed to hide the fungus. Particularly from Greece.

Next time sign your unverified biased remarks mate. 205.142.197.91 (talk) 19:58, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone else think it is overly generous letting the paragraph stand about Pistachios curing acne and conferring Fabio-quality hair upon daily consumers? krc 03:41, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I moved it here:

Pistachio nuts are good for curing acne and helping your hair and nails to grow. Eating about a handful a day will help you to see benefits. They give you long, thick flowing hair and beautiful, smooth and clear skin. [citation needed] Dogface 18:35, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It would be interesting to know why pistachios are marketed with their shells mostly intact (opposed by many other nut-like thingies). Anybody know?  ITAL 08:19, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This language looks like it was added by Paramount Farms to promote themselves:

Paramount Farms[5], the largest commercial producer of pistachios in the United States, operates and maintains a public website with information on pistachio health, nutrition, history, and facts, as well as links or downloadable files for all of the above health research studies and more at PistachioHealth.com.[6]

PeterLake0 12:59, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Latest edit appropriate? Nik The Stoned (talk) 17:17, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Map accuracy?[edit]

in the worldwide production section, the table says that most production in the US is in California, but in the graphic, all the yellow circles are in the midwest. which is correct?   — Chris Capoccia T⁄C 19:08, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The program that automatically generates these charts all over Wikipedia clusters dots around the capital city of each country. In many contexts I agree with you this looks misleading, and sometimes just silly. krc 02:13, 10 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rumpuscat (talk • contribs)

Perhaps I'm nitpicking, but did anyone else notice that the part of the map with the US's production of pistachios has all the yellow dots over the eastern and midwestern regions (like Ohio, Pennsylvania, Kentucky and Michigan would be)... while the section where the article claims most of the US crop is is grown (California) has no dots? Perhaps, in the name of accuracy, we could move the yellow dots for anyone who might see the article and think that California is in the eastern half of the country? Ryecatcher773 (talk) 05:43, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking the same thing TrevorLSciAct (talk) 22:01, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have reorganized the prior contributions, collecting here the ones about the map. The map really is pretty bad. How about removing it from the article until it can be fixed? --Una Smith (talk) 16:04, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pistachio diseases ?[edit]

I don't understand the "Diseases" section at all. Could someone who does make it more reader-friendly? SCEhardt 00:24, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Man, when I originally saw that I thought it's the diseases you can get from eating them which totally freaked me out. Would someone please say it's the diseases that the plant gets, not the humans eating them (or they could be some for humans too, I haven't check all of them though). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.55.198.235 (talk) 02:49, 10 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Done I fixed this problem by eliminating the section and working the content into the Cultivation section. --Una Smith (talk) 16:02, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adding External Link[edit]

I'd like to recommend that an external link to the Western Pistachio Association website be added under "External Links." The website's URL is www.westernpistachio.org. On several other Wiki pages for nuts like Almonds and Peanuts - they include links to associations like The Almond Board of California and the International Nut and Dried Fruit Council Federation. The WPA is a great resource for people interested in learning more about pistachios including recent reserach findings, nutritional facts, etc. Adchi (talk) 20:07, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that link looks appropriate per guidelines at WP:EL, so I've added it. – jaksmata 15:14, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GRIPES[edit]

1. The Talk page header is way too long. Come on, this is ridiculous. 2. The "Pistachio principle" meaning eating less because you have to shell them one by one sounds like its author never ate pistachios? They are not hard to shell at all (unless they are improperly split), shelling+shell disposal takes about the time it takes to chew one. They never survive long since they are really tasty. Principle seems to be bogus. You should try sunflower seeds for this. Furthermore, link 9 to principle is 404. --88.74.170.182 (talk) 07:12, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Pistachio principle does not just take into consideration the shelling time, but plays on the psychological fact that you feel you have ate more because you are doing more to eat something than if you had to do less to eat the same amount.
Try this, place 1000 shelled pistachios in 1 bowl, and 1000 unshelled pistachios in another bowl. Find a test subject who is not aware of the Pistchio Principle, to rule away bias, Counting how many they ate, On day 1, at lets say 6pm before dinner, tell them to eat from the shelled bowl until they feel full, On day 2, at 6pm again, tell them to eat from the unshelled bowl unil they feel full, On day 3 the same again with shelled, On day 4 unshelled.
Do this for 8 days with shelled/unshelled on alternating days.. and then count on average which bowl needed less nuts to make the user feel full, you will find that the shelled bowl in most people will make them full with less nuts than the unshelled ones.
There is always exceptions, but you should test this on atleast 5 people, for 4 days minimum, and you wil begin to understand that to feel "FULL" is not always 100% physical, but also psychological, similar to how you tend to buy more food at the supermarket when hungry, than when full. Never the less, the information is sourced and is warranted mentioning in the article. --94.193.135.142 (talk) 20:25, 18 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

origin of pistachio[edit]

The name Pistachio is a combination word, Pista and chio, the first part is the real Persian name of the nut and the second part is derived from the Persian word shoor meaning salty or salted, most probably the first travelers who tried this nut in Iran centuries ago were given the salted type as pista-shoor and them not completely familiar with Persian language were thinking that this is the name for it and pronounced it closet to what they heard./m.m —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.61.25.254 (talk) 20:24, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bogus text removed[edit]

Here is the raw text I just removed from the main page because the reference was obscene and bogus.

Like mussels, persons may risk significant illness if pistachio is consumed without shell having fully opened.[1]

References

  1. ^ "No. 3686 | Domestic Economy | Page 4". Irandaily. Retrieved 2011-01-17.

RE: Health benefits[edit]

I removed this on the basis that it's worth discussing:

In December 2008, Dr. [[James Painter]], a behavioral eating expert, professor and chair of School of Family and Consumer Sciences at [[Eastern Illinois University]], described the Pistachio Principle. The Pistachio Principle describes methods of "fooling" one's body into eating less. One example used is that the act of shelling and eating pistachios one by one slows one's consumption, allowing one to feel full faster after having eaten less.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://pistachiohealth.com/health-care-professional/weight-management/pistachio-principle |title=The Pistachio Principle |publisher=Pistachiohealth.com |accessdate=17 January 2011}}</ref>

Perhaps this is true; perhaps it isn't. This is certainly referenced but it's essentially self-published and not an independent and reputable source. It's essentially speculation and could be entirely out-of-thin-air conjecture.

I did some searching and reading on NCBI/PubMed/etc. for this "Pistachio Principle" and anything on pistachios and the like but I found nothing at all related to this and, as I think it would be not in the interest of the article and perhaps even the wiki to retain this on the article page, I have moved this to here for now. --Qwerty Binary (talk) 10:28, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This appears over-zealous to me Qwerty_Binary. If, in your opinion, an item requires a better reference then please use eg the refimprove tag rather than resorting to wholesale deletion of another editor's work. Wiki is a general encyclopedic resource not a professional scientific publication. In this instance, the "Pistachio principle" is not a theorem of natural science but refers to a metabolism/behaviour system. A cursory bit of research on my part turned up: http://www.improbable.com/2011/10/26/the-pistachio-principle/?ModPagespeed=noscript and from there the abstract of the paper concerned: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195666311001553 - In-shell pistachio nuts reduce caloric intake compared to shelled nuts, Carla S. Honselman, James E. Painter, Karla J. Kennedy-Hagan, Amber Halvorson, Kathy Rhodes, Tamatha L. Brooks, Kaitlin Skwir, Family and Consumer Sciences, Eastern Illinois University. In future please would you help to improve articles by virtue of the quality of your research rather than with your censure. If you do not have time to do so then please would you refer your matters of concern to the Talk pages concerned and request the input of other editors. LookingGlass (talk) 09:44, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confusion and labelling[edit]

Package labelling describes contents with respect to the whole nuts (shell and kernel) however the nutritional information describes kernels only. I have been unable to find better informmation than the following pdf that states a 30gm helping comprises appx 60 nuts or 30 kernels Nut Fact Sheet pdf. The pdf seems well researched however I can find no refence on the net apart from this one to the proportion of nut weight to kernel weight. IMO this wiki article would benefit from greater clarity on when it is referring to the nuts and when only to their kernels, and it would be helpful to introduce information regarding nut, shell, and kernel, somewhere early on in it, by reference to this pdf if no better source can be found. LookingGlass (talk) 10:02, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

BC/AD conversion to scientific terms BCE/CE (Before Current Era/Current Era)[edit]

I would recommend that the page convert to the emerging scientific convention of describing years based on the more neutral terms of "before current era (BCE)" and "current era (CE)" for labeling year numbers. - Ken (talk) 01:51, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

characteristic[edit]

this sentence: "marinated prior to roasting in a salt and strawberry marinade, or salt and citrus salts" needs either more clarification, or a citation, preferably both. the listed coloring ingredients, both the strawberry marinade and the citrus salt sound rather dubious. 176.63.176.112 (talk) 22:09, 12 February 2017 (UTC).[reply]

How can they be "near threatened" when they are grown in large quantities all over the world?[edit]

The article says they are "near threatened" but does not explain why. They are grown in large quantities all over the world. What is the justification for the "near threatened" status? 71.182.240.254 (talk) 22:41, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Content with references in subsection called Diseases and environment added under Cultivation. Is this sufficient to indicate the many vulnerabilities of pistachios? --Zefr (talk) 00:33, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Domesticated forms have a fraction of the genetic diversity of wild populations. Conservation assessors consider the wild populations, not domesticates. Aurochs are extinct, Przewalski's horse is endangered, even though these animals are considered the same species as domestic cattle and horses. Plantdrew (talk) 20:56, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, as Plantdrew stated, conservation status ignores domestic populations. That's why the axolotl is simultaneously the world's most popular species of pet salamander, and critically endangered to the point of being extinct in the wild.--Mr Fink (talk) 03:09, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Thank you everyone for all of that. 71.182.250.83 (talk) 06:37, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Pistachio. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

https://www.nasimahealth.com/are-pistachios-healthy/


https://web.archive.org/web/20110819040318/http://journals.iut.ac.ir/emag/jstnar/eabsv13n47y2009p60.pdf to http://journals.iut.ac.ir/emag/jstnar/eabsv13n47y2009p60.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:00, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

History section[edit]

@Zefr: The current wording of the history section is not convenient in my humble opinion. I don't get why you removed Iran from the list of regions where the pistachio tree may have originated while two of the three cited sources explicitly support this claim. The Kew source (number 5) supports a Central Asian and Afghan origin (see their map). Source number 6 (Britannica) states : "The pistachio tree is believed to be indigenous to Iran.". Source number 7 states : " Native P. vera forests are located in northeastern part of Iran particularly in Sarakhs region. This native P. vera is the origin of cultivated pistachio trees in Iran.". Also, i don't understand your edit summary "not credible that Iran alone is the one origin", since Iran was not the only cited origin, it was cited along with Central Asia and Western Asia (i have no problem with replacing Western Asia with Afghanistan in order to avoid redundancy). Please let me know if you think that i'm mistaken. Cheers.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 21:44, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikaviani - thanks for the collegial discussion. If we take all the history sources together, including the A-Saghir reference used in the first sentence (can be read online but is blacklisted by Wikipedia) and the Kew source, it seems sufficient to say the origin is in Central Asia (as the Kew map shows; present-day Iran is an area of intoduction) which the Wikipedia article defines to include pre-Islamic Iran. I felt it was reasonable to state what appears to be the general consensus region among the sources. --Zefr (talk) 22:56, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Zefr: Thanks for your reply. The problem is that the origin of Pistacia Vera is not well known and the sources describing it are quite rare. Also, only the Kew source is currently taken into account, giving it an undue weight over the two other sources. By the way, the definition of Central Asia differs from one source to another, for example, the UNESCO definition of this region is way larger and also includes north-eastern Iran, almost all Afghanistan, Mongolia, large parts of China, etc ... We should find a better wording of this part of the article that would be closer to what the three sources say, this is why i propose to include Central Asia, Afghanistan and Iran as the possible places of origin. Best.---Wikaviani (talk) (contribs) 23:14, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Red dye[edit]

As I recall, in the US in the 1950s, all pistachio shells were red. Then, quite suddenly, I never saw any dyed shells. Was there a discovery or law that caused this rapid change? The current text does not reflect this sudden change. Kdammers (talk) 01:03, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kdammers - When Iran dominated the world pistachio market decades ago, a red dye was used to disguise natural undesired color blemishes on the shells, as explained here. Improved harvesting methods in years since eliminated a need for the dye. That HuffPost article and another source say that the Iran hostage crisis of 1979 halted demand for Iran's products under embargo, including red pistachios, at a time when California's pistachio industry was growing with different cultivation and harvesting methods that prevented any shell discoloration, enabling sales of the natural shell and nut we have today. If you check the article history, the HuffPost article was used to support content explaining this under Botany/Characteristics. I moved and copyedited this segment under the Consumption section now. Zefr (talk) 02:19, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pistachio&oldid=1197047525"