SkipCaptcha
12,693
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 498:
Line 498: + +
User talk:TheAmericanRedoubt (view source)
Revision as of 07:28, January 3, 2015
, 07:28, January 3, 2015→Ayurvedic medicine
I fail to see how numerous articles on Ayurvedic medicine belongs on a place like Conservapedia. There is little to no clinical evidence to backup any of the treatments or theories, which goes against the conservative principle of only relying on proven facts. [[User:PhilH|PhilH]] 02:20, 3 January 2015 (EST)
I fail to see how numerous articles on Ayurvedic medicine belongs on a place like Conservapedia. There is little to no clinical evidence to backup any of the treatments or theories, which goes against the conservative principle of only relying on proven facts. [[User:PhilH|PhilH]] 02:20, 3 January 2015 (EST)
: No clinical evidence? Not according to the U.S. National Institute of Health and numerous conservatives (and medical doctors in the America who integrate modern medicine with complementary medicine) who and rely on complementary medicine including Herbology, Chinese Medicine, Ayurveda and Acupuncure. There are many conservatives blogs and forums that I follow that have regular articles on complementary medicine. Complementary/alternative medicine is not some liberal or New Age thing. It is even paid for by many insurance companies now and worker's comp in certain U.S. states. I will be submitting clinical evidence from MedLine / PubMed for my articles. [[User:TheAmericanRedoubt|TheAmericanRedoubt]] 02:28, 3 January 2015 (EST)