"

I would be glad to, Noformation. A conflict of interest is defined as ""Where advancing outside interests is more important to an editor than advancing the aims of Wikipedia"". The aims of Wikipedia is to produce a ""neutral, reliably sourced encyclopedia"". My position is that editors from the rational-skeptic wikiproject and their ilk are NOT neutral in this subject, and in fact are incapable of being neutral because they do not have any hands on empirical experience with acupuncture, no specialist dedicated learning in it, have not taken the time to grapple with the unique and complex paradigm that contextualizes it, and thus their knowledge of it is incomplete and immature, and they are ill-equiped to provide a full, rounded, mature and neutral synthesis of the information available on this topic.

Now, as for myself, I will tell it straight, I work 12~15 hours per week in acupuncture practice, earning $35 per hour. Acupuncture practice is not my main source of income, in fact my only purpose for practicing acupuncture is to deepen my understanding of the art and sharpen my skills in it. It requires 10,000 hours of purposeful practice to become a master of any discipline, and one day I aim to achieve mastery in this discipline.

I refute the suggestion that those people who are most qualified, have the most experience, have done the most study, and are most knowledgeable and passionate about this subject should be excluded from editing on the grounds of COI. In fact these are the ones whose input is most valuable, far more valuable than the input of ivory-tower rational skeptics who only bother to attempt to understand acupuncture through a theoretical, critical and dismissive point of view. In fact, considering the tone of most editors on the acupuncture talk page, which emulates the tone of those ""Quackwatch"" websites that proliferate on the web these days, and considering their devoted following of Edzard Ernst and their elevation of his work as the number 1 source on the page (literally), and their transparent agenda of ""de-bunking"" the ""pseudo-science"" they consider acupuncture to be, it rather seems to an objective observer that is those editors who are "" advancing outside interests"" rather than being neutral, and thus they in breach of COI, as opposed to I.  "