a few clarifications are necessary:

1- i'm sorry i did not state this earlier: i DO value brian's work in creation and maintenance of this site. and i DO understand his concerns and reservations. nevertheless, i disagree with his method and decision in this case.

2- i DO NOT advocate a "free for all." i'm no more interested in junk science than anybody else, and it's great to have informed moderators in a setting like this. however, no moderator in any setting can be assumed to be fully objective and that's human. in a case like this, many of us would learn a lot more from a healthy debate around the issues that have been raised than from staying in the dark. for example, it would be helpful to know what glaring "inaccuracies" there were in that article which, by brian's own admission was not too poorly researched. the issue seems to have been more with the other stuff in the site than with the content of the article itself.

3- had i not posted another article link in another nutrition thread on "adjunctive therapies" board i would not raise the question of inconsisency in this case. if it is a rule to not post links to this board why wasn't the other link removed? was it because it was to a page on NCI site? hmmm...

be well.

gita