joshbuddy, with due respect, given your manifest ignorance (lack) on this subject then on what basis am I to accept your opinion of the verified Lead-in language rather than my own opinion that the verified Lead-in language is fine? For goodness sake, your previous edit asserted gross error on an extremely important subject, one where continued health and/or life have hung in the balance more than a few times. 

As for the rest of the article, I do plan on addressing some pure opinion therein, and to add verification where it is needed along the way. Despite this future work, and contrary to your opinion, the current introduction does provide sufficient summarization for an encyclopaedic entry. Before you tinker anymore with this subject I recommend you read a wide range of peer reviewed literature on the same subject. You’ll find the current, verified, introductory language to be consistent. That you have not applied yourself to this endeavour already is manifest, so I am not making any assumptions on this point. This is a very serious subject deserving of a very high standard of presentation and substantiation.