| Revision as of 21:41, 19 October 2014 editBobrayner (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers53,706 edits typo fix← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 18:43, 12 December 2024 edit undoBon courage (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users66,163 edits →Ayurveda is not a pseudoscience.: see Talk page noticeTag: Manual revert |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
{{Notice|{{find}}}} |
|
{{Notice|{{find}}}} |
|
|
{{ArbComPseudoscience}} |
|
{{Vital article|level=4|topic=Science|subpage=Biology|class=C}} |
|
|
|
{{Trolling}} |
|
{{WikiProjectBannerShell| |
|
|
|
{{controversial}} |
|
1={{WikiProject India|class=c|importance=mid|past-collaboration=week of 3 July 2006}} |
|
|
|
{{tmbox |
|
{{WikiProject Alternative medicine|class=c}} |
|
|
|
|image=] |
|
{{WikiProject Skepticism|class=c|importance =low}} |
|
|
|
|text=<big>'''WARNING: ACTIVE ARBITRATION REMEDIES'''</big><br> The article ] is currently subject to '''discretionary sanctions''' authorized by active arbitration remedies (see ]). The current restrictions are: |
|
{{WikiProject Hinduism|class=c|importance =high}} |
|
|
|
* '''Limit of one revert in 24 hours:''' This article is under ] (one ] per editor per article ''per 24-hour period'') |
|
{{WikiProject Religion|class=c|importance=Top}} |
|
|
|
{{Collapse|1= |
|
{{WikiProject Dietary Supplements | class=C | importance=top }}}} |
|
|
|
Enforcement procedures: |
|
|
* Editors who violate these restrictions may be blocked <u>without warning</u> by any uninvolved administrator, even on a ''first offense''. |
|
|
With respect to the WP:1RR restriction: |
|
|
* Edits made solely to enforce any clearly established consensus are exempt from all ] restrictions. In order to be considered "clearly established" the consensus must be proven by prior talk-page discussion. |
|
|
* Clear vandalism of any origin may be reverted without restriction. |
|
|
* Reverts of edits made by anonymous (IP) editors that are not vandalism are exempt from the 1RR but are subject to ]. If you are in doubt, contact an administrator for assistance. |
|
|
] can be used against any editor who repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the ], any expected ], or any ]. Discretionary sanctions can include blocks, topic-bans, or other restrictions.<br> |
|
|
If you are unsure if your edit is appropriate, discuss it here on this talk page first. '''Remember: When in doubt, don't revert!''' |
|
|
|2=<span style="color:red">Remedy instructions and exemptions</span> |
|
|
|bg=#EEE8AA}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
<big><br>'''Please note''' that due to disruption of this page, '''if you have come here to object to the use of the words "quackery" or "pseudoscience" in this article''', your comment <u>will be removed without reply</u> if it does not give a policy-based reason why these terms are incorrect.<br><br> Please read ], ], ] and ] before posting here.</big> |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{Contentious topics/talk notice|ipa|brief}} |
|
|
{{Canvass warning|short=yes}} |
|
|
{{connected contributor|User1=Editswikifornepali|U1-EH=yes|U1-declared=yes|User2=Arunjithp |U2-EH=yes |U2-declared=yes}} |
|
|
|
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|class=B|vital=yes|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Alternative medicine}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Alternative Views|importance=Top}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Dietary Supplements|importance=High}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Hinduism|importance =high}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject India|importance=high|past-collaboration=week of 3 July 2006}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Medicine|importance=low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Religion|importance=high}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Skepticism|importance=Top|attention=yes}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{Reliable sources for medical articles}} |
|
|
{{Other banners|collapsed=yes| |
|
|
{{Press |
|
|
| subject = article |
|
|
| author = |
|
|
| title = Plea Seeks Removal Of 'Defamatory Content' On Ayurveda From Misplaced Pages |
|
|
| org = ] |
|
|
| url = https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/plea-seeks-removal-of-defamatory-content-on-ayurveda-from-wikipedia-2950295 |
|
|
| date = 6 May 2022 |
|
|
| quote = "The contents of the matter shown on Misplaced Pages totally malign the natural system of medicine which has a history of more than 3,000 years and is widely respected and accepted the world over, " the petitioner said, pointing out the fact that the incumbent Government of India has also constituted a separate Ministry named ] for Ayurveda and other alternative medicine systems. The petition further stated that the Constitution of a separate ministry is an acknowledgment of this ancient stream of medicine, the petition said. |
|
|
|
|
|
| subject2 = article |
|
|
| author2 = |
|
|
| title2 = "You Can Edit Misplaced Pages Articles" : Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain Plea Against Misplaced Pages Articles Allegedly Defaming Ayurveda |
|
|
| org2 = Live Law |
|
|
| url2 = https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/you-can-edit-wikipedia-articles-supreme-court-refuses-to-entertain-plea-against-wikipedia-articles-allegedly-defaming-ayurveda-212241 |
|
|
| date2 = 21 October 2022 |
|
|
| quote2 = "The petition referred to the article published on Misplaced Pages termed Ayurveda as a pseudoscientific and stated that the article written on Misplaced Pages was unnecessary and written purely with the intent to tarnish Ayurveda. "The matter of concern is that this is utterly absurd, poorly researched and prejudiced article pops up as the first article when Ayurveda is searched on Google", the petition said |
|
|
|
|
|
| subject3 = article |
|
|
| author3 = |
|
|
| title3 = SC Refuses to Entertain PIL Against Misplaced Pages Entry Describing Ayurveda as 'Pseudoscientific' |
|
|
| org3 = ] |
|
|
| url3 = https://m.thewire.in/article/law/sc-refuses-to-entertain-ayurveda-pil/amp |
|
|
| date3 = 21 October 2022 |
|
|
| quote3 = The ] (PIL) submitted that the Misplaced Pages entry described Ayurveda as “pseudoscientific” and, calling the article unnecessary, alleged that it had been written with the sole intention of tarnishing the image of Ayurveda. |
|
|
|
|
|
| subject4 = article |
|
|
| author4 = Catherine Davison |
|
|
| title4 = Modi wants to export traditional Indian medicine to the world, but doctors warn against pseudoscience and quack cures |
|
|
| org4 = ] |
|
|
| url4 = https://www.codastory.com/waronscience/india-traditional-medicine/ |
|
|
| date4 = 4 November 2022 |
|
|
| quote4 = The second sentence in the Misplaced Pages entry for Ayurveda declares that the “theory and practice of Ayurveda is pseudoscientific.”}} |
|
|
{{mergedfrom|Panchakarma}} |
|
|
{{mergedfrom|Ama (ayurveda)|date=17 November 2018}} |
|
{{Old peer review|archive=1}} |
|
{{Old peer review|archive=1}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}} |
|
|archiveheader = {{talk archive navigation}} |
|
|maxarchivesize = 70K |
|
|maxarchivesize = 150K |
|
|counter = 5 |
|
|counter = 22 |
|
|minthreadsleft = 4 |
|
|minthreadsleft = 0 |
|
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
|algo = old(31d) |
|
|algo = old(120d) |
|
|archive = Talk:Ayurveda/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|archive = Talk:Ayurveda/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
}} |
|
}}<font size = 4>'''Please add new comments at the bottom of the page and sign with four tildes <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>. Note that you can be ] and fix mistakes yourself.</font size> |
|
|
|
{{User:HBC Archive Indexerbot/OptIn |
|
|
|
|
|
|target=/Archive index |
|
== Can you add a new section on here called (Ayurveda meets Nanotechnology) == |
|
|
|
|mask=/Archive <#> |
|
|
|
|
|
|leading_zeros=0 |
|
"Two India-born scientists have embarked on a new fundamental shift in cancer therapy with no side effects, radiation and chemotherapy by using several of the anicent Ayurvedic concoctions (native to india) and nanotechnology. Pharmaceuticals Ltd has explianed the process of which The nanoparticles will be crushed to about one thousandth of the width of human hair then injected into the body where they bind to the surface of cancer cells. Being metal and mildly radioactive, they slowly burn the offending cells to extinction.<ref>http://www.lef.org/news/lefdailynews?NewsID=11477</ref> |
|
|
|
|indexhere=yes |
|
http://www.lef.org/news/lefdailynews?NewsID=11477] (]) 08:40, 12 October 2014 (UTC)Caplock |
|
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
__TOC__ |
|
== I am Not happy with The information from (Efficacy) section on this page taking words out of context from cancer reserach page == |
|
|
|
|
|
Who ever created The (Efficacy) section on here is taking words out of content from the cancer research page, The cancer research page has stated that it has shown possitive effects and even scientist in america have tested some of the compounds while stating possitive to slowing down cancer, The Efficacy section needs total editing if you wish to keep it! |
|
|
|
|
|
"More than 200 herbs and plants are used in Ayurvedic medicine. Some early laboratory and animal research suggests that compounds taken from traditional Ayurvedic medicines may be able to slow the growth of cancer in animals. Although this early research looks promising, there is no evidence that Ayurvedic herbal medicines can prevent, treat or cure cancer in humans. We won't really know whether Ayurvedic medicine is helpful in treating cancer until large randomised clinical trials have been carried out." |
|
|
|
|
|
"Research is looking into whether some herbs or plant treatments used in Ayurvedic medicine could help to prevent or treat cancer.But we don't know much about some of the treatments that are part of Ayurvedic medicine, such as special diets and herbal remedies. These treatments could be harmful to your health or interfere with your conventional treatment" |
|
|
|
|
|
"Research has found that some aspects of Ayurvedic medicine can help to relieve cancer related symptoms and improve quality of life" |
|
|
|
|
|
Withaferin A |
|
|
|
|
|
In America in 2011 researchers took a compound called Withaferin A (WA) from the Ayurvedic medicinal plant Withania somnifera. They found that in the laboratory Withaferin A stopped the growth of some types of breast cancer cells. It also stopped the growth of breast cancer in mice. Several other studies support these findings. |
|
|
|
|
|
Sanjeevani |
|
|
|
|
|
An Indian study in 2011 looked at selaginella bryopteris, a traditional Indian herb referred to as Sanjeevani. It found that compounds taken from the herb stopped the growth of cancer cells in the laboratory. The compound also reduced the development of skin tumours in mice. |
|
|
|
|
|
Indian frankincense |
|
|
|
|
|
A US research study also in 2011 looked at acetyl-11-keto-beta-boswellic acid (AKBA) taken from the gum resin of the boswellia serrata known as salai guggal or Indian frankincense. Traditionally, this substance has been used in Ayurvedic medicine to treat inflammatory conditions. The researchers found that AKBA slowed the growth of bowel cancers in mice and made the cancer less likely to spread. |
|
|
|
|
|
Mangosteen |
|
|
|
|
|
The mangosteen fruit has a long history of medicinal use in Chinese and Ayurvedic medicine. Recently, the compound alpha mangostin taken from the outside layer of the fruit was shown to kill various types of cancer cells in laboratory studies. This led Japanese researchers to test alpha mangostin in mice. The substance slowed the growth of breast cancer in mice and it was much less likely to spread to the lymph nodes. |
|
|
|
|
|
Pomegranate |
|
|
|
|
|
Pomegranate (Punica granatum) is seen as a sacred fruit in some world religions. Many cultures and systems of medicine, including Ayurvedic medicine, have used it for various health problems. Early research in the laboratory seems to show that pomegranate extracts may have anti cancer properties against prostate, bowel and liver cancer. But there are no studies so far looking at the use of pomegranate in humans. |
|
|
|
|
|
MAK-4 and MAK-5 |
|
|
|
|
|
Some laboratory studies have looked at Ayurvedic herbal remedies called MAK-4 and MAK-5. The remedies seemed to show some activity in controlling tumours in rats and cancer cells in lab dishes. But there have been no studies in humans.<ref>http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/cancers-in-general/treatment/complementary-alternative/therapies/ayurvedic-medicine</ref>] (]) 09:07, 12 October 2014 (UTC)caplock |
|
|
|
|
|
:You are not allowed to copy from these websites. See ]. ] (]) 10:17, 12 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
But you copied direct from this website to give the following: |
|
|
"There is no scientific evidence for the effectiveness of Ayurvedic medicine for the treatment of any disease" |
|
|
|
|
|
just asking myself why you never gave the full verse from that website which was: |
|
|
|
|
|
"There is no evidence that Ayurvedic herbal medicines can prevent, treat or cure cancer in humans. We won't really know whtether Ayurvedic medicine is helpful in treating cancer until large randomised clinical trials have been carried out" |
|
|
|
|
|
Just seems like the whole page has been casted into negativity just by that small verse placed at the very top and agian placed at the lower portion of the page, i mean you and i know that the chemicals found in Ayurvedic have shown results in combating cancer, so to have a section at the very top claiming (no scientific evidence for the effectiveness) has been found is a error, as i pointed out it has shown to be effective on cancer cells and that information came from the cancer reserach page. |
|
|
|
|
|
Also To make this fair as this seems abit one sided, could we not make a page about Toxic metals used for western treatments and link it up with this page? |
|
|
|
|
|
(toxic Mercury) is used in silver fillings across europe and america, it is one of the most common fillings used by children and adults, The fillings always leak mucury into the body just by chewing or brushing or even by inhaling, when the filling is taken out Mercury gives off vapour which can cause harm.as |
|
|
|
|
|
Rice grown in the USA has an average "260 ppb of arsenic", also found in american drinking water. |
|
|
just think someone should even up the playing feild abit instead of just hammering the indian text over toxic metals which can be found in over 70 percent of the mouths in america and europe.] (]) 11:50, 12 October 2014 (UTC)caplock |
|
|
|
|
|
:Copied? No it was rephrased! If you have got many issues to discuss, please discuss 1-by-1. ] (]) 11:55, 12 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Wiki at the top of every search term on google, it is Important that you give a fair write up of both possitive and negative in the section bellow == |
|
|
|
|
|
"There is no scientific evidence for the effectiveness of Ayurvedic medicine for the treatment of any disease.Concerns have been raised about Ayurvedic products; U.S. studies showed that up to 20% of Ayurvedic U.S. and Indian-manufactured patent medicines sold through internet contained toxic levels of heavy metals such as lead, mercury and arsenic."f |
|
|
|
|
|
The bjp Of india asks If you can write the details on this page of the product used in the american studies, they wish to know what you mean by "Ayurvedic products" as this is too vague. Was it about herbal tea? massage oils? Medicine? natrual Food diet? If you do not have the details of products In the ref then please remove it and replace it with a more detailed information. |
|
|
|
|
|
Avurveda is a blanket term for a wide variety of treatments, Thank you |
|
|
http://www.hindustantimes.com/lifestyle/wellness/scientists-find-potential-medicine-for-treating-arthritis/article1-1275762.aspx] (]) 18:32, 15 October 2014 (UTC)Caplock |
|
|
:Hi. The sentence you quoted is supported by two references; the specific information you're looking for can be found at the cited sources. The lede shouldn't have too much detail, as it's meant to summarize the the article, but more detail can also be found in the ] section near the end of the article. Cheers, ] (]) 18:54, 15 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Dawn, The refs seem to point out that the use of toxic metals is only used and found in (Rasa Shastra) treatments. Ayurveda has two different ways of treatment.. |
|
|
|
|
|
1. (strict use of Herbs and non metals) |
|
|
2. (The use of metals with herbs), known as (Rasa Shastra) |
|
|
|
|
|
The summary should at least give account of the main points such as the type of Ayurveda that blends metals with herbs in the first place, I feel it is very misleading to give a negative summary of Ayurveda without giving the information of Rasa Shastra being the test study of the toxins, please edit the following as a example to the summary. |
|
|
|
|
|
"Concerns have been raised about The use of Ayurvedic Products containing rasa shastra teatments; U.S. studies showed that up to 20% of Ayurvedic rasa Shastra Medicines From U.S. and Indian-manufactured patent medicines sold through internet had contained toxic levels of heavy metals such as lead, mercury and arsenic, this is not to be confused with The Strict herbal and non metal treatments of Ayurveda" cheers] (]) 16:02, 16 October 2014 (UTC)caplock |
|
|
:No. The problem is not confined to Rasa Shastra, as is made clear in the body of the article. ] (]) 16:17, 16 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Rasa shastra is the use of mixing metals with herbs/plants, the test found toxic metals mixed with herbs as one of the refs pointed out, the body of the ref talks about the toxics used and gives details on mercury,lead which is from Rasa Shastra as the Rasa Shastra wikipedia page states. |
|
|
|
|
|
Well i will be placing (Rasa Shastra) in the summary this week, like it or lump i dont really care as the case of metals and herbs in Ayurveda is stated as (Rasa Shastra). |
|
|
|
|
|
I will not add the following "this is not to be confused with The Strict herbal and non metal" but i am going to add (Rasa Shastra)Thank you and good day] (]) 21:55, 16 October 2014 (UTC)Caplock |
|
|
|
|
|
== Eight components of Ayurveda== |
|
|
|
|
|
], You should know that every single citation that has been added to ] cites reliable medical citation, falling well under ], that is:- |
|
|
''Literature reviews or systematic reviews published in reputable medical journals, academic and professional books written by experts in the relevant field and from a respected publisher, and medical guidelines or position statements from nationally or internationally recognised expert bodies''. |
|
|
:Before making removal of longstanding, and highly ''commonly'' accepted content, you should consider analyzing every citation, that you have considered to be against ]. ] (]) 03:43, 16 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
::] How about - . Information seems to be common, and non-disputed. ] (]) 03:56, 16 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
:::e/c none of those comply. -] (]) 03:59, 16 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
{{reflisthide}} |
|
|
::::I cannot see any reason to remove, since each of these sources falls under the ]. I cannot believe that you can seriously reject ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ as reliable source for meds, it has been used not only on other pages but also this page. Can you explain a bit more? ] (]) 04:01, 16 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:Nope. No way, no how. To make extraordinary assertions like this, you will need heavy-duty MEDRS sources stating that the predominant view among experts in real medicine is that this pseudoscientific claptrap can be compared to real medical specialties. And that just ain't gonna happen because most real physicians and scientists would vomit at the mere thought. ] (]) 04:02, 16 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
::ncbi.nlm.nih.gov is well enough for sourcing the whole above. Can you explain how it is not a ''heavy duty MEDRS'' ? Or you can cite even a single scientist who consider these as ''pseudoscientific''?] (]) 04:07, 16 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::Because it does not state that the predominant view among experts in real medicine is that this pseudoscientific claptrap can be compared to real medical specialties, as I said above.And the burden is on YOU, not on me. You're the one making extraordinary claims. ] (]) 04:12, 16 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
::::I am not, it is ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. Are you saying that source has to explicitly state that it is ''predominant view among experts''? Since it remains ''non-disputed'', considerably cited by multiple MedRS, how will you justify? ] (]) 04:14, 16 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
::::Lets see, I cited '''' it has been also considered by http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK7271/ the author, ] had his journals published in (there are many, this is just 1 example). Do I have to explain each source now? Though these are enough. ] (]) 04:27, 16 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::::::Your lack of understanding of what "published" means is disappointing. That is not an example of Ramachandra having "his journals" published in . -] (]) 23:37, 16 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
::::::::Already told by many on Medical wikiproject that it wasn't even required to. So you lacked the understanding of using source from start. ] (]) |
|
|
|
|
|
Dominus Vobisdu is just doing his daily rounds of puffing up his chest on wikipedia, The information that blade has cited is fine.] (]) 22:15, 16 October 2014 (UTC)Caplock |
|
|
|
|
|
== Unexplained removal of terms on eight components == |
|
|
|
|
|
], can you inform that how ] disallow you to wikilink the technical terms at least once on the section? Also what's the reason behind removing the terms like ], ], etc. When they are clearly supported by the reliable citations and there's clear consensus to include them. I am doubtful that why you are telling me to follow ], when I am already doing with this longstanding content. </br> |
|
|
Claiming that ''they are not equivalent'' is just part of your ] and ultimately because you ]. Are you saying that no one has ] anything during 1000 BCE because ] of that time wasn't equivalent to current times? It's simply nonsensical, just like you have been told on ]. Will you consider providing a policy backed rationale? ] (]) 23:10, 18 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
:fwiw, i support the removal of those wikilinks. ayurveda is prescientific traditional medicine and what it may consider to be "toxicology" is unrelated to contemporary toxicology. the link in the article to a history section in the ] is appropriate; if there were history sections in toxicology, etc then links to those would be appropriate as well. i don't believe there is a policy that governs this one way or the other; it is just something editors working on the article, need to reason their way to a ] on. ] (]) 00:35, 19 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
:::] Every article must adhere to basic policies, and none of the wikilinking policy would support the removal. Consensus has been already established for this longstanding content. Everything differs from each other, no subject is 100% identical to other. Every single reliable citation that has been to the article provides those exact terms and meanings. |
|
|
:::So you are saying that ''if they have'' history section then only it would be appropriate? Sounds resolute, hopefully if you agree with so, I can create for each, ofcourse with the balance and recognition of every other origin. Knowing that very of those categorized articles are short, tag bombed and some of them looks like a list. It maybe easy to expand (e.g. toxicology, read or (Ayurvedic origins), (ancient Greece), pediatrics). |
|
|
:::For now, can you link surgical(#3) to ]? ] (]) 03:02, 19 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
::::as i wrote above, as far as i can see there is no policy that is definitive on having these specific wikilinks '''or''' not having them. If you believe there is a policy or guideline that makes it clear that the wikilinks ''should'' be there, please provide it. if you cannot provide one, please acknowledge that this is a discussion about preferences, or perhaps, our best judgement, and stop waving policy around. That would make the discussion more straightforward. btw, is there some reason you are asking me to create the wikilink, instead of doing it yourself? ] (]) 03:11, 19 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
:::::], no page for specific medical terms though. I thought I am about to cross 3rr as I have been reverted 2 times for that pointed content. I shall wait for few hours, by then I will probably discover other history sections. ] (]) |
|
|
|
|
|
::::::hmm, are you saying that the average reader doesn't know what "surgery" is? Linking to the main "surgery" article seems rather like ] to me. Do you see what i mean? linking to ] makes a bunch more sense, with respect to providing a link to related information elsewhere, per UNDERLINK. does that make sense? i'll implement that one. ] (]) 03:54, 19 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::How about we remove the edition of the word 'medicine' from this article because this medicine is not equivalent to many of the modern medicines, and some other traditional medicines that came later. Forgetting that they played pioneering role along with other ancient civilizations that directly influenced the modern medical specialties. ] (]) 02:21, 19 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Equivalents in applicable history or alternative medicine should apply, as with ]. --] (]) 15:43, 19 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== worldwide spread == |
|
|
|
|
|
In , i removed the content: "In last few decades Ayurveda has spread around the world" which was sourced from: |
|
|
# {{cite book|title=Healing Your Life: Lessons on the Path of Ayurveda|page=7|year=2012}} Written by Marc Halpern, Published by Lotus Press, year 2012 and |
|
|
#"Textbook of Pharmacognosy and Phytochemistry", Written by Biren Shah, page 455, published by Elsevier, year 2009, |
|
|
The sentence is nonencylopedic (last decades from what date?) and pretty ] too. For that kind of claim we need ] sources - something like the WHO. Both sources provided are within the tradition and not the kind of thing we should rely on for a strong claim like this. ] (]) 03:47, 19 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
:Agreed. It's puffery without clearly independent and reliable sources. --] (]) 15:34, 19 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
:Well put Jytdog. ] (]) 19:26, 19 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 1 September 2024 == |
|
== Going forward == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{edit semi-protected|Ayurveda|answered=yes}} |
|
I was asked to take a look at this. Here's what I am proposing from now on. |
|
|
|
Please add that "Recent findings confirmed the nanotherapeutic functionalities of metal derived ayurvedic drugs like jasada basma. The demonstrated experiments,physicochemical and bio-characterization reveal that ayurvedic rasa drugs synthesized and processed through traditional methods are not toxic due to the variation in its structure-property relationship from macro to nano dimensions." please add the following reference for the above edit.https://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acsomega.2c05391 ] (]) 12:18, 1 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
*No reverts, at all, for any reason other than obvious vandalism. There should be no reason to do this. ]. |
|
|
|
:{{notdone}} fails ]. ] (]) 12:26, 1 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
*No name-calling, however mild, from either side. No use of terms like "quack" or "censorship", including in edit summaries, or any reference to any editor's supposed affiliations or motivations. There should be no reason for anyone to do this either. Any legitimate complaints about editor behaviour can be referred to me or to ], in that order of preference. |
|
|
*Any major changes to the article must be agreed here in talk beforehand. Discussions may be referred to central noticeboards like ] or to ], in fact I encourage this. |
|
|
All participants here are assumed to be aware of these restrictions; I'll ping all the main players as well. Any breaches of these conditions will be met with escalating blocks, without further warnings being given. Anybody unhappy with these proposals is welcome to take it up with me at my talk and if they are unhappy with my response to take it to WP:AN/I. --] (]) 20:34, 19 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Effectiveness == |
|
*Thank you; this is excellent. I would love to see this kind of action taken on more articles.(] (]) 21:19, 19 October 2014 (UTC)) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Can anyone add the section where this treatment is effective like the case with former Kenyan president's daughter who were unable to treat her eye disease, none of the treatment was successful but in the end when she used ayurvedic treatment helped her get her eyesight back.There are several articles about this,you can google it, i can't add links because it's not allowed ] (]) 14:59, 3 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
:Thanks for proposing this but I think 0RR is not a good idea. I think much better would be that ] be made mandatory, for some set period of time. We still want to allow editors to be ] or the article will stagnate. So better, would be that bold edits are allowed, and one subsequent revert is allowed and no more, so that the normal ] cycle unfolds. If the subsequent discussion doesn't achieve consensus, normal dispute resolution processes can unfold. Does that make sense? The rest of it seems fine to me, especially heightened civility requirements. ] (]) 21:30, 19 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:{{notdone}}. Discussions of effectiveness need ] sourcing as a basis. ] (]) 15:01, 3 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
===A concern=== |
|
|
|
:Well one source would have been nice, even if it did fail medrs .] (]) 15:03, 3 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
I appreciate that this article would benefit from a firm hand, John, but: |
|
|
|
::https://m.economictimes.com/industry/healthcare/biotech/healthcare/will-take-ayurveda-to-africa-ex-kenya-pm-raila-odinga-after-daughters-eyesight-recovery/amp_videoshow/89549503.cms ] (]) 08:04, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
# Are you ''proposing'' these restrictions, or ''imposing'' them? You start by saying it's a proposal, but end by saying that people who break your rules will be blocked. |
|
|
|
:::Fails ] and even if it did not it would need attribution "Raila Odinga claimed". ] (]) 09:48, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
# I'm sure these rules are well-intentioned; but with a ''zero'' revert rule, anybody can add problematic or WP:FRINGE content to the article and it'll stay permanently. This restriction seems incompatible with BRD. |
|
|
|
::::Ok, so you mean former prime minister of Kenya is lying, even if I add that 'he claimed' would you still not revert my edits? ] (]) 10:23, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
# Is there some good reason that concerns about behaviour, or about your rules, should be referred to you rather than to the community? The effect of that would be more like ]. I would prioritise using this talkpage, and community noticeboards, instead of your talkpage. |
|
|
] (]) 21:40, 19 October 2014 (UTC) |
|
:::::No I am saying he is not a medical expert. ] (]) 10:31, 4 September 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
== "]" listed at ] == |
|
|
] |
|
|
The redirect <span class="plainlinks"></span> has been listed at ] to determine whether its use and function meets the ]. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at '''{{slink|Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 10#Ayurveda/Non-confirmed editor comments}}''' until a consensus is reached. <!-- Template:RFDNote --> <span class="nowrap">—''']'''</span> <sup class="nowrap">(] • {]•]})</sup> 16:40, 10 December 2024 (UTC) |
Please add that "Recent findings confirmed the nanotherapeutic functionalities of metal derived ayurvedic drugs like jasada basma. The demonstrated experiments,physicochemical and bio-characterization reveal that ayurvedic rasa drugs synthesized and processed through traditional methods are not toxic due to the variation in its structure-property relationship from macro to nano dimensions." please add the following reference for the above edit.https://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/acsomega.2c05391 Casira (talk) 12:18, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Can anyone add the section where this treatment is effective like the case with former Kenyan president's daughter who were unable to treat her eye disease, none of the treatment was successful but in the end when she used ayurvedic treatment helped her get her eyesight back.There are several articles about this,you can google it, i can't add links because it's not allowed 2409:40D1:16:36AD:DCD2:F1FF:FE81:2E7F (talk) 14:59, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
Not done fails WP:MEDRS. Bon courage (talk) 12:26, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
The redirect Ayurveda/Non-confirmed editor comments has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Misplaced Pages:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 10 § Ayurveda/Non-confirmed editor comments until a consensus is reached. —CX Zoom 16:40, 10 December 2024 (UTC)