 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Cancer / February 2008re:Ayurvedic Medicine
J" <nswex@nalid;non> wrote in message news:47978D19.EF350776@execulink.com... | OldBill wrote: | Subject: Ayurvedic medicine. | Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 | > Recent advances in our medical therapies based on | > Ayurvedic principles are impressive. | > Maybe if we followed them a bit closer the health of the | > Western World would improve. | > Epidemiological studies show a yawning gap between our | > scientific (and expensive) therapies and the centuries-old | > therapies of India,with us at the losing end. | > | > Bill Thomas | > Cardiff UK. | | < http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080122/folk_medicine_08012 2/20080122?hub=Health [big snip]| | Dangerous amounts of lead have also been found in ayurvedic medicines, | which are used in India and commonly found in South Asian immigrant | communities in New York, Chicago and Houston. These medicines include | ghasard, a brown powder given to relieve constipation in babies, and | mahayogaraj gugullu, for high blood pressure. | | Traditional medicines may account for up to 30 percent of all childhood | lead poisoning cases in the United States, according to the Centers for | Disease Control and Prevention. The Environmental Protection Agency | estimates 240,000 U.S. children were diagnosed with high blood lead levels | in 2004 to 2006. [sip] | The use of folk medicine is rooted in generations-old cultural traditions. | Ayurvedic medicine, for example, originated more than 2,000 years ago in | India, where 80 percent of the population uses it. [snip] | In a 2004 study that found high concentrations of lead in ayurvedic | medicine, Boston University researcher Robert Saper bought 70 different | ayurvedic remedies at 30 stores within a 20-mile radius of Boston City | Hall. One in five contained potentially harmful levels of lead, mercury | and arsenic. | Patients sickened by home remedies often have more serious cases of lead | poisoning than those poisoned from other sources because the medicines | frequently contain extremely high concentrations of lead and are | deliberately swallowed, said Mary Jean Brown, chief of the CDC's lead | poisoning prevention branch. | | In 2004, the CDC reported 12 cases of lead poisoning associated with | ayurvedic remedies in Texas, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New York and | California. In one case, a 37-year-old woman, hospitalized with abdominal | pain, nausea and vomiting, reported taking five different traditional | medications for rheumatoid arthritis. [snip]| Well 'J' you have certainly been persistent in your searches, considering that my message was written in March last year. It's a bit disappointing that after all this time you have come up with a newspaper cutting. I intended things to be viewed more on the macro scale, such as the following,which is extracted from: GLOBOCAN 2000: Cancer Incidence, Mortality and Prevalence Worldwide, Version 1.0. Comparison of Cancer Incidence in U.S. and India US India Cancer Cases Deaths Cases Deaths Breast 660 160 79 41 Prostate 690 130 20 9 Colon/rectum 530 220 30 18 Lung 660 580 38 37 Stomach 81 50 33 30 Testis 21 1 3 1 Bladder 202 43 15 11 Brain, nervous 65 47 19 14 Thyroid 55 5 12 3 Endometrial 163 41 132 72 Ovary 76 50 20 12 Multiple myeloma 50 40 6 5 Hodgkin's disease 20 5 7 4 Showing cases per 1 million persons calculated on the basis of current consensus: Endometrial cancers include Cervix uteri and Corpus uteri. Old Bill. > J" <nswex@nalid;non> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 116 lines] > > Endometrial cancers include Cervix uteri and Corpus uteri. Bill, thanks for the interesting stats. I have a couple of criticisms, though---one cosmetic and one substantive. First, the column alignment didn't work well for me. I tried cutting and pasting into a fixed-font environment, but still no go. ISTR there being an easy way to fix this, but not what it is. I blame the drugs. The easiest/best way to produce tables of information for distribution on the 'Net is to use HTML tables. Unfortunately, the more primitive ng tools don't handle it, and the more ignorant luddites rant against its use in ngs, so it would probably generate complaints here. Second, I don't see anything above that associates the use of ayurvedic medicine with the cancer rates in any causal sense. They may be casually associated, yet have no causal relationship. A thorough study could reveal that India's cancer rates are the result of a high consumption of cardamom, an avid interest in cricket, or something else entirely. This is a problem general to treatments that haven't been rigorously and scientifically studied. Without isolating a treatment from other variables, false causation is too easily assumed. Children with big feet tend to have better spelling ability than do those with small feet. People who consume more than three cups of coffee a day tend to have higher incidence of heart disease. Etc. --- CSM | > J" <nswex@nalid;non> wrote in message | > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] | > | > Comparison of Cancer Incidence in U.S. and India [snip] | Bill, thanks for the interesting stats. I have a couple of | criticisms, though---one cosmetic and one substantive. First, the [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] | --- | CSM Thank you for your reply CSM.Please excuse the time I have taken with my response.I do not log on every day,and never on a Sunday. With regards to the first of your two criticisms: yes, the column alignment is faulty. My apologies. After I had posted the message it came up on my screen as I suspect it had come up on yours. I do not know the reason and I thought if I altered my line length and then reposted, it might come out correctly,but then it might not,in which case I would be compounding the error. I felt it was not too difficult for readers to correct the error in their mind's eye,so I left it at that.It was also getting late. I hope you managed to make sense out if it. With regard to your second criticism: Reading the message several months after it was written I think it was sloppily done,and were I to write it now I would have ommited the word "medicine" from the heading. As you have seen, the message body uses the word "principles" which today would have expressed my current interests more accurately because in my view lifestyles are more important than magic bullets. Nevertheless I did have two very helpful and prompt replies,one from Figgertoes and one from poor Isi. I agree completely that false causation is easily assumed,eg "There is a high incidence of cardiovascular disease in England. In Japan where the consumption of fats and oils is much lower, the incidence of CVA is lower than in the UK In France,where they eat lots of fats and oils,the incidence of CVA is much lower than in the UK. If you want a healthy heart,don't speak English." For all that the incidence of cancer in India is much less that in America. There must be some reason why,and IMHO it is lifestyle, which may well be influenced by Ayurvedic Principles,hence my enquiry. I hope this clears things up. Old Bill. > <csm7...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 70 lines] > mind's eye,so I left it at that.It was also getting late. > I hope you managed to make sense out if it. Yes, I did. The reason the columns don't line up has to do with the variable width of different characters. For instance, an 'i' isn't nearly as wide as a 'w' in most fonts. There's a way to choose the font you use, and you can pick a "fixed-size" font, that doesn't have this problem, for things like tables. I just can't recall *how* to do it, and it would depend partly on the tool used. My memory was bad enough before taking all those poisons. Now it's worse. > With regard to your second criticism: Reading the message > several months after it was written I think it was sloppily done,and were I [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Old Bill. I agree that the difference between cancer rates could well be due to lifestyle differences. However, the key difference could have nothing to do with the ayuvedic principles---or it could be be related. There's no reasonable way to tell without a study that isolates other factors. My supposition could also be completely wrong, and it could be unrelated to lifestyle. It's possible that Indians are missing genetic markers that tie to cancer risk. This seems extremely unlikely, as the difference would likely have been noted in the U.S., U.K., and elsewhere with substantial populations of Indians, but it's possible. It also could have something to do with climate, latitude, or something I'm not even thinking of. There are just too many differences between the population groups to reasonably associate one with another. The required study would is unlikely to ever be commissioned. It would take a large mixed group, with subgroups using various mixes of the differences between Indians and some other group, following them for decades to see cancer and other disease rates. All of this with no drug company to foot the bill. --- CSM | > <csm7...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:ec8950e8-1922-4a2f-a0bc-712b0a3a3d72@j20g2000hsi.googlegroups.com... | > | > J" <nswex@nalid;non> wrote in message | > | > [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] | --- | CSM I'm with you on all these points,CSM; any,all,or none of those factors you mention could be causative,including Ayurveda. I said it was an opinion I was giving and so it is. I hold it because it is an one that I really want to hold. I cannot change my genetic make up, or go and live in India, whilst on the other hand I certainly do not wish to carry on waiting and watching my markers increase without any attempt to minimise the progression, so I research Ayurveda. I think to myself "If Western lifestyle has brought me to this condition,perhaps Eastern lifestyle will take me off it." There is no mainstream cure for my condition. There are other options of a similar kind open to me which I can consider also, but in the case of Ayurveda I have internet acquaintances who have made remarkable recoveries from cancer through therapies which are based on it, people who are alive and well,and going about their daily lives and doing their jobs without ever having been on chemo. They are living proof that it works, and it is my strongest line. For reasons of confidentially I cannot name them,and what I write is anecdotal. Purists may say "Unproven" but I can reply "Nor is it disproven". I hope this explains my position. Best Wishes, Old Bill. "What's wrong with an anecdote if it's true?" [Beata Bishop: "A Time to Heal".] > <csm7...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 74 lines] > "What's wrong with an anecdote if it's true?" > [Beata Bishop: "A Time to Heal".] I believe you have explained your position. I can't say that I agree, but I understand. --- CSM > > <csm7...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > >| > GLOBOCAN 2000: Cancer Incidence, Mortality and Prevalence Worldwide, [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > I agree that the difference between cancer rates could well be due to > lifestyle differences. Yes, I already explained that. A smaller percent of people in India live over 65 years of age ( ages,where higher rates of cancer occur) Age Structure (CIA World Fact Book) US 0-14 years: 20.2% (male 31,152,050/female 29,777,438) 15-64 years: 67.2% (male 100,995,752/female 101,365,035) 65 years and over: 12.6% (male 15,858,477/female 21,991,195) (2007 est.) India 0-14 years: 31.8% (male 188,208,196/female 171,356,024) 15-64 years: 63.1% (male 366,977,821/female 346,034,565) 65 years and over: 5.1% (male 27,258,259/female 30,031,289) (2007 est.) They die of other causes first. http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/35/6/1522 Diseases of the circulatory system were the leading causes of mortality (32%), with similar proportions of deaths attributable to ischaemic heart disease and stroke. Second was injury and external causes of mortality (13%) with one-third of these deaths attributable to deliberate self harm. Third were infectious and parasitic diseases (12%). Tuberculosis and intestinal conditions each caused one-third of deaths within this category. HIV was assigned as the cause for 2% of all deaths. The fourth and fifth leading causes of death were neoplasms (7%) and diseases of the respiratory system (5%). There's another problem with data from thrid world countries such as Asia. I think the data here is more current than what Bill's presented. It says Globocan 2002 http://www-dep.iarc.fr/ Cancer Incidence in Five Continents Vol. IX Somewhere in one of the sections they rate Data Collection is US as "A" and Asia as "C" and give further explantions as to why. Over the many years I"ve been here, people from India have come to these (4) cancer newsgroups and what they're looking for is treatments that work (cure or extend the lives), never even mentioned ayurvedic. http://www-dep.iarc.fr/CI5-IX/PDF/chapter6.pdf Population data Cancer registries generally submitted population denominators for each individual year of the reference period, or for one year corresponding to the mid-year of the reference period. These are based on a census, which was carried out around the year 2000 in most of the countries. File editing and misinterpretation of the codes were the only source of errors discovered in the last three volumes. Whenever possible, the population data have been checked by comparing http://www-dep.iarc.fr/CI5-IX/PDF/chapter5.pdf Chapter 5: Comparability and quality of data Even this must be interpreted in the light of local circumstances; in some developing countries, the quality of death certificates may be very poor, with a fair number of erroneous cancer deaths, which the registry may have difficulty tracing back to a hospital capable of confirming (or not) the death certificate statement. Table 5.5 shows the registration practice used to distinguish the DCN cases and DCN (%) by each registry. Failure to use death certificates, when these are available and can be linked to the registry database, is generally taken to mean that some lack of completeness is likely to be present. Table 5.6 has Group A Death reporting meets WHO recommendations Group B No access to death certificates Official mortality data not available by cause, or poor quality by cause Group C No official mortality data No ad hoc study of completeness No Death Clearance as source of case finding. I would expect that the majority of the population of INdia falls under Group C and the majority of the populaion of US falls under Group A - IOW the India causes of death are unreliable. J | > > <csm7...@hotmail.com> wrote in message | > >| > GLOBOCAN 2000: Cancer Incidence, Mortality and Prevalence Worldwide, [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] | | Yes, I already explained that. Are you the author of this reply,'J'? Or has it been passed to you by your sources? If so,have you read it? | A smaller percent of people in India live over 65 years of age ( ages,where higher | rates of cancer occur) [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] | 15-64 years: 63.1% (male 366,977,821/female 346,034,565) | 65 years and over: 5.1% (male 27,258,259/female 30,031,289) (2007 est.) This is a comparison of life expectancies in the USA and India. Neither CSM nor I were writing about life expectancies. We were writing about comparative cancer incidence in the USA and India. | They die of other causes first. | http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/35/6/1522 [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] | leading causes of death were neoplasms (7%) and diseases of the respiratory system | (5%). This is a comparison of causes of death in the USA and India,not the comparison of cancer incidences in these two countries. | There's another problem with data from thrid world countries such as Asia. | | I think the data here is more current than what Bill's presented. It says Globocan | 2002 Yes,it is more current than what I presented. Thank you. | http://www-dep.iarc.fr/ | Cancer Incidence in Five Continents Vol. IX At last, something about cancer incidence. | Somewhere in one of the sections they rate Data Collection is US as "A" and Asia | as "C" and give further explantions as to why. Are you sure you have read this reply that you send? If so why do you not give a link to this statement instead of leaving us to plough through a very large document? | Over the many years I"ve been here, people from India have come to these (4) | cancer newsgroups and what they're looking for is treatments that work (cure or | extend the lives), never even mentioned ayurvedic. So what? What's that got to do with cancer incidences? | http://www-dep.iarc.fr/CI5-IX/PDF/chapter6.pdf | Population data Cancer registries generally submitted population denominators for | each individual year of the reference period, or for one year corresponding to the | mid-year of the reference period. These are based on a census, which was carried [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] | and the majority of the populaion of US falls under Group A - IOW the India causes | of death are unreliable. The word "death" occurs eight times in the above. You do understand by now that you should be writing about cancer incidence not cancer deaths,don't you? There is an expression in my part of the UK,it is "Send the Fool further". It seems to me that I have been sent down a few blind alleys on this occasion Nevertheless I did log on to http://www-dep.iarc.fr/CI5-IX/PDF/chapter6.pdf which you gave above, and after much searching I was able to produce the following two graphs. They illustrate a comparison of cancer incidence with age between New |York State, USA, and Mumbai,India. Please click on these two links: http://www-dep.iarc.fr/CI5-IX/Age-specific-curves1p1c.asp?groupp=1&selection_pop =146&Text-p=population&groupc=1&selection_cancer=620&Text-c=cancer&male=1&female =2&age_from=1&age_to=18&colour=1&size=2&line=2&submit=%A0Execute%A0 and http://www-dep.iarc.fr/CI5-IX/Age-specific-curves1p1c.asp?groupp=1&selection_pop =103&Text-p=population&groupc=1&selection_cancer=620&Text-c=cancer&male=1&female =2&age_from=1&age_to=18&colour=1&size=2&line=2&submit=%A0Execute%A0 What they give are graphs showing the number of cancers per 100,000 by age of the population in each geographical area. I could not get graphs for all of the USA and all of India, but these were taken at random without selecting those most favourable to my point of view. At the first cursory glance the two look very similar but take a look at the vertical axis and you will see that the scales differ.In the New York State graph the range is from 10 to 10,000, in the Mumbai graph the range is only from 1 to 1,000. To take two instances from these graphs: In New York State, between about 20 to 30 babies per 100,000 have cancer, whereas only about 10 babies per 100,000 in Mumbai have cancer. Likewise in New York State between about 3,000 and 4,000 people per 100,000 aged 80 to 85 have cancer,whereas in Mumbai between about 500 and 900 people per 100,000 aged 80 to 85 have cancer. It makes no difference that there are more people in this age group in New York State than in Mumbai,what we are talking about here is a rate not a simple number--we are talking about the number of cases per 100,000 of the population. Quite clearly the cancer risk for all ages is very much less in Mumbai than it is in New York State, and I am pretty confident from figures that I have published earlier that that applies to the whole of the USA and the whole of India too. Well,I have answered your points,'J'.You have given me a lot of work,but I have answered your points. I have said this before and I shall say it again now, (and I mean it kindly): You are out of your depth. There is a place for you on this newsgroup; you bring a great deal of comfort to some subscribers and I have no doubt that your "advice" and guidance (in the non-medical sense) is a help to them. You can also be arrogant and rude and your ethical standards are no better than they ought to be, You tell us that you are "just a Canadian helping others on their journey." Well,if I am on a"journey" as you describe it, it is a journey that I do not wish to take to a destination I hope never to reach, and I do not want help to get there from anyone, not even you. Old Bill. > "J" <nswex@nalid;non> wrote in message > | They die of other causes first. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > So what? What's that got to do with cancer incidences? J > "J" <nswex@nalid;non> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 132 lines] > > You are out of your depth. http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/330/7485/215-c BMJ 2005;330:215 (29 January), doi:10.1136/bmj.330.7485.215-c India has some of the highest cancer rates in the world Parts of India have the world's highest incidence of cancers of the gall bladder, mouth, and lower pharynx, India's first cancer atlas shows. View larger version (53K): [in this window] [in a new window] The atlas, produced by the Indian Council of Medical Research, has also found pockets of stomach and thyroid cancer in the south of the country. The National Cancer Registry Programme in Bangalore used data from 105 hospitals and private clinics in 82 of the 593 districts in India to map the incidence of cancer, as part of a project funded by the World Health Organization. The survey included more than 200 000 patients with histopathologically confirmed cancers, whose details were sent to the registry through the internet. Previously, the registry, which was launched in 1981, had covered just a few cities and a single village and had relied on hospital records and death certificates to estimate the burden of cancer. It used to take up to five years to submit the information. Data analysis for the atlas took just 15 months. The atlas, scheduled for release by the health ministry within the next few weeks, indicates that the age adjusted incidence of gall bladder cancer in women in New Delhi is 10.6 per 100 000 of the population—the world's highest rate for women for this cancer. Districts in central, south, and northeast India had the world's highest incidence of cancers associated with tobacco, which is chewed as well as smoked in India. Aizawl district in the northeastern state of Mizoram has the world's highest incidence of cancers in men of the lower pharynx (11.5 per 100 000 people) and tongue (7.6 per 100 000 people), the atlas shows. The district also has the country's highest rate of stomach cancer among men. The incidence of mouth cancer among men in Pondicherry was 8.9 per 100 000, one of the highest rates in the world for men. Rates of stomach cancer were high among men in Bangalore and Chennai. "These findings will give us a better picture of realities [on the ground] and help [us to make] wiser resource allocation," said Dr Purvish Parikh, head of medical oncology at the Tata Memorial Hospital in Mumbai. Cancer epidemiologists have long been concerned that diagnostic services for cancer are inadequate in many parts of India. The survey also detected "a belt of thyroid cancer" in women in coastal districts of Kerala, Karnataka, and Goa. The findings are expected to stimulate research to identify risk factors at specific locations. "[Lower] pharynx cancer may be linked to tobacco use, but we're going to explore the genetic components of stomach cancer," said Dr Eric Zomawia, pathologist at the Government Hospital in Aizawl and collaborator on the project. The incidence atlas also confirmed earlier observations that breast cancer has replaced cervical cancer as the leading site of cancer among women in Indian cities and that lung cancer is the most common cancer in men in Calcutta, Mumbai, and New Delhi. | > "J" <nswex@nalid;non> wrote in message | > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] | > | > [very big snip] | > |J writes: ... .. | > | http://www-dep.iarc.fr/CI5-IX/PDF/chapter5.pdf | > | Chapter 5: Comparability and quality of data [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] | > India causes | > | of death are unreliable. [ Rpt.] I would expect that the majority of the population of INdia falls under | > Group C | > | and the majority of the populaion of US falls under Group A - IOW the | > India causes | > | of death are unreliable. || [Rpt] IOW the | > India causes | > | of death are unreliable. and suddenly -- in a flash -- they become reliable! | http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/330/7485/215-c | BMJ 2005;330:215 (29 January), doi:10.1136/bmj.330.7485.215-c | India has some of the highest cancer rates in the world | Parts of India have the world's highest incidence of cancers of the gall bladder, mouth, and lower pharynx, India's first cancer atlas shows. It seems we have gone the full circle.From News Item to News Item. I'm prepared to leave it there. Old Bill. > "J" <nswex@nalid;non> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > to News Item. > I'm prepared to leave it there. That's not a news item. It's the British Medical Journal. J > > > <csm7...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > > >| > GLOBOCAN 2000: Cancer Incidence, Mortality and Prevalence Worldwide, [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > J > J" <nswex@nalid;non> wrote in message > | OldBill wrote: [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > Well 'J' you have certainly been persistent in your searches, Searches????? It was on the news, in case you don't recognize the date in the url. > considering that my message was written in March last year. > It's a bit disappointing that after all this time [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] > > Endometrial cancers include Cervix uteri and Corpus uteri. There's cancers missing in your list. Nevertheless; if you're trying to prove that Ayurvedic prevents cancer or cures cancers, you've failed miserably. They don't live long enough to get (higher incidences of) cancers... Age Structure (CIA World Fact Book) US 0-14 years: 20.2% (male 31,152,050/female 29,777,438) 15-64 years: 67.2% (male 100,995,752/female 101,365,035) 65 years and over: 12.6% (male 15,858,477/female 21,991,195) (2007 est.) India 0-14 years: 31.8% (male 188,208,196/female 171,356,024) 15-64 years: 63.1% (male 366,977,821/female 346,034,565) 65 years and over: 5.1% (male 27,258,259/female 30,031,289) (2007 est.) They die of other causes, some of which are listed here. http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/35/6/1522 Diseases of the circulatory system were the leading causes of mortality (32%), with similar proportions of deaths attributable to ischaemic heart disease and stroke. Second was injury and external causes of mortality (13%) with one-third of these deaths attributable to deliberate self harm. Third were infectious and parasitic diseases (12%). Tuberculosis and intestinal conditions each caused one-third of deaths within this category. HIV was assigned as the cause for 2% of all deaths. The fourth and fifth leading causes of death were neoplasms (7%) and diseases of the respiratory system (5%). Conclusion Non-communicable and chronic diseases are the leading causes of death in this part of rural India." Ayurvedic Medicine might cost less but doesn't do them much good. J | > J" <nswex@nalid;non> wrote in message | > | OldBill wrote: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] | > | | > | < http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080122/folk_medicine_08012 2/20080122?hub=Health | > [big snip]| | > | [quoted text clipped - 61 lines] | | There's cancers missing in your list. You want more stats?Try this. You'll get them by the bucketful. http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2407/2/37/ | Nevertheless; if you're trying to prove that Ayurvedic prevents cancer or cures cancers, you've failed | miserably. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] | 15-64 years: 63.1% (male 366,977,821/female 346,034,565) | 65 years and over: 5.1% (male 27,258,259/female 30,031,289) (2007 est.) These figures have little significance except to the purist but just to clear the point I have made an age-related adjustment to two of the cancers in the above table, breast cancer and prostate cancer. Assuming that children under the age of 15 do not get either of these diseases the revised numbers of cases for the remaining 79.8% in USA and 68.2% in India become: USA 742 and India 115 for breast cancer and USA 776 and India 32 for prostate cancer. As can be seen, there remains a very great difference between the USA and India. | They die of other causes, some of which are listed here. | http://ije.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/35/6/1522 [snip] | | Conclusion Non-communicable and chronic diseases are the leading causes of death in this part of rural | India." So what? This is irrelevant and a typical 'J' ploy| - "Digress to divert the argument elsewhere." Stop clutching at straws. | Ayurvedic Medicine might cost less but doesn't do them much good. | J I believe that the immense differences are due to the different lifestyles of the two nations,and that Ayurveda plays a signifant role. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.