qing hao

[Guest guest]

, " " wrote:

I am not as impressed by the outcome-based studies of various

prescriptions. >>>

 

 

Z'ev:

 

Nor I. That was my point, too.

 

 

Jim Ramholz

[Guest guest]

At 5:07 PM -0700 10/12/03, wrote:

>Please take note of the following request. It does reiterate my oft-stated

>group policy for listing of topics. If CHA is to be used for efficient

>research, then we must try and comply with this.

>

>thanks.

>

>Todd

>

>Hi

>A short while back on the e-mail discussion group there

>was some actual discussion about the herb qing hao. Since then the

>discussion has gone into other issues, still under the name of qing hao.

--

 

 

Looking back, there was only one post in the thread, the first one,

that mentions qing hao, and the subject of the post was equally to do

with research quality, and that is the topic that has continued. Qing

hao as a treatment in malignancy had been mentioned a few times in

other threads. I see no post asking about non-hodgkins lymphoma that

could have promoted the discussion your correspondent is looking for.

 

There are 855 people d to this list, yet fewer than 40 post

to it. Naturally enough, those who sustain the discussion are the

ones that take things in directions that interest them, and sometimes

it's difficult to keep changing the subject heading when the

discussion is ranging around two or three issues. OTOH, specific

questions, such as one about qing hao and non-hodgkins lymphoma,

always get a response if the question is asked. It's really not a

very effective way to get questions answered to not post them.

 

So, to all you lurkers out there, speak up! - nothing bad will happen.

 

Rory

--