"
I really don't know and admit my sample size is small -). But I do believe their approach isn't satisfactory as a core foundation for the ""treatment"" section in an encyclopedia. Even if they reliably did good work, their output is not directly relevant to ""how is this disease treated?"". I think we forget that is the primary question. The ""why is this treatment recommended?"" is a secondary question which ultimately leads to the ""what evidence is there that it is effective/safe?"", along with ""is it available in my country?"" and ""what are the side effects?"", etc, etc. But sadly it seems WP medical articles are not written by people asking reader-questions in order to guide what to say. They are written by non-experts surveying the handy output of PubMed and collating a bunch of factoids they don't fully understand. In fact, that approach sounds just like the one done by the volunteer authors of the Cochrane ketogenic diet paper, who are district hospital doctors with no clinical experience of the subject.

I managed to avoid your cold through my regime of mega-vitamins, herbal tinctures and homeopathic bath salts. -)  °Talk "