Posted by Dr. Bob on August 16, 2003, at 0:11:49
In reply to Re: Psycho-Babble Nutrition Board???, posted by medlib on May 6, 2003, at 0:43:06
> I think PB is just fine for those posts. If something is touted as being able to perform the same function as meds, changing the biochemistry of the body by ingesting something, then leaving it on the meds board next to pharmaceuticals that do the same makes sense.
>
> DinahYes, I see what you mean...
> For those of us who are augmenting our meds, how would we direct our questions? Would any focus on nutritional supplementation go to the other board even if it focused on the interaction between the two?
>
> kara lynneI think it would be more likely that someone knowledgeable about supplements would know about their interactions with medication than someone knowledgeable about medication would know about their interactions with supplements, but that's just a guess...
> I like the separate boards so far, but it is time consuming to check different boards.
>
> noaI know, but you can't do everything...
> Babble boards seem to be proliferating like rabbits; perhaps, it's time to consider some limits. One I'd like to offer for consideration would require that any new board must *replace* (or consolidate with) an existing board. What do you think?
>
> medlibThere may not be much reason to keep 2001, at least not in its current form. Tele is kind of a special case. There's not much harm in a little proliferation, is there?
I'm feeling inclined to go ahead with something like this. Partly to have a more organized grocery store, partly so PB wouldn't be so busy. But what to call it? "Nutrition" may be a little too narrow. The NIH term is "complementary and alternative":
http://nccam.nih.gov/health/whatiscam
But that's kind of wordy. "Unconventional"?
Bob
poster:Dr. Bob
thread:223126
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20030808/msgs/251243.html