Talk:Lifestyle diseases

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] I'm baffled

Quote from Edit summary:

(I wrote this artice. It is 100% philosophy of alternative medicine. I am reporting your vandalism again!)

I'm baffled how he can put "Lifestyle Diseases" in the category of "Philosophy of alternate medicine". If someone can explain the reasoning behind it.... well, I'll be suprised that there was reasoning beyond 'fly-posting' - Xgkkp 10:15, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I shall repeat it one more time. I am the original author of this article.

Philosophy of alternative medicine articles are clearly NOT branches of alternative medicine, nor talking about history or famous people. Obviously, they are articles that talk about the philosophy of the movement or the natural philosophy theories that underlie alternative medicine. Wellness would be a good example, if it was not for its poor writing style and content. Alternative medicine is another classic example of the philosophy of alternative medicine.

Lifestyle Diseases discusses the philosophy behind only one branch of alternative medicine called natural health. It would have nothing to do with other branches, like homeopathy for example. John Gohde 23:20, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

MHN's defintion of alt med includes anthing remtoly related to boilgoy or lifstely that is not part of the pathogen desase modleGeni

[edit] This article has a twin which is missing!

The lifestyle diseases article has a twin which is missing! I should know since I wrote both articles. This article has a companion article called modifiable risk factors. It is actually just about the only article on the web that talks about this subject in general rather than going down the list disease by disease. Both articles were originally part of one big web page on on my website. The twin is missing and is going to stay missing. Just thought that you might want to know that my generosity in developing Wikipedia has limits.

And by the way, I have already added the Wellness (alternative medicine) article to my folk edition of Wikipedia. I have also modified it. So, my copy is now better than Wikipedia's. I don't have the time to clean it up every time somebody takes a crap, even on the talk pages. -- 00:01, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)