SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Neuroprotective Effects of Ginseng Phytochemicals: Recent Perspectives.

Molecules · 2019-08-14

DOI: 10.3390/molecules24162939PMID: 31416121

Open accessreview-article; Review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

As our global population ages, the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases is critical to our society. In recent years, researchers have begun to study the role of biologically active chemicals from plants and herbs to gain new inspiration and develop new therapeutic drugs. Ginseng (Panax ginseng C.A. Mey.) is a famous Chinese herbal medicine with a variety of pharmacological activities. It has been used to treat various diseases since ancient times. Extensive research over the years has shown that ginseng has potential as a neuroprotective drug, and its neuroprotective effects can be used to treat and prevent neurological damage or pathologically related diseases (such as Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, Huntington's disease, depression symptoms, and strokes). Moreover, evidence for the medicinal and health benefits of ginsenoside, its main active ingredient, in the prevention of neurodegenerative diseases is increasing, and current clinical results have not reported any serious adverse reactions to ginseng. Therefore, we briefly review the recent research and development on the beneficial effects and mechanisms of ginseng and its main active ingredient, ginsenoside, in the prevention and treatment of neurodegenerative diseases, hoping to provide some ideas for the discovery and identification of ginseng neuroprotection.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.