Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Bioregulatory medicine: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
I agree with view above, and those changes implemented by editors sound sensible, so article seems to settle for consensus. Perhaps Bobryner who suggested deletion may be now ready to withdraw deletion, and keep article in current form ? |
I agree with view above, and those changes implemented by editors sound sensible, so article seems to settle for consensus. Perhaps Bobryner who suggested deletion may be now ready to withdraw deletion, and keep article in current form ? |
||
I think that Bioregulatory Medicine is a new type of science based on an eclectic platform. This may be confusing to old fashion and conservative scientists, who only think within the box. |
Revision as of 17:32, 1 June 2014
I am deeply impressed with the concept of Bioregulatory medicine and would only like to say well done to those guys!! I do not agree that scientific evidence is lacking as there is plenty of evidence in the text and available for additional editing. Plus it is a modern concept! Critics who overlook the profound common sense of bioregulatory medicine fail to recognize that evidence, and therefore sound rather dogmatic.
I agree with view above, and those changes implemented by editors sound sensible, so article seems to settle for consensus. Perhaps Bobryner who suggested deletion may be now ready to withdraw deletion, and keep article in current form ?
I think that Bioregulatory Medicine is a new type of science based on an eclectic platform. This may be confusing to old fashion and conservative scientists, who only think within the box.