Talk:Health science

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This article is developing and not approved.
Main Article
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition The helping professions that use applied science to improve health and to treat disease. [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup category Health Sciences [Categories OK]
 Subgroup category:  Health science
 Talk Archive none  English language variant British English

are you sure you want to make the distinction between healing arts and health sciences, Everything is referred to by "ABC science" and if this is the universal way people call things,.... David Goodman Yes, David. To call traditional healing arts "health science" is an oxymoron and confuses everything, leading to articles - such as the one I edited, in which little to no real information is given.That article actually had a couple of lines dedicated to the fact that some of the disciplines that were covered were NOT " science ". Instead, "Healing Arts" and "Health Care" articles can give Chinese Traditional Medicine and other very important healing arts their due, and "Health Science" can actually cover the Allied Health Sciences which, alone, is an enormous subject. I'm just getting started on it. Regards, Nancy Sculerati MD 06:05, 2 November 2006 (CST)

I use the recently added sentence on chiropractics as an example of non-neutrality. I share NS's presumed bias that it is relatively worthless as therapy and absurd as science. I would not present it as a sole example here in the initial part of an article. Somewhere in this article there should be a relatively non-specific presentation of alternative health sciences, with reference to the good articles now being written on each. The evidence for the status should there be presented, so the reader may judge.

chiropracter and alternative medicine

actually, I think a lot of the therapy actually works well for backs - but that the theory is not biology. That's the point I was trying to make, a chiropracter is often very effecting at relieving back pain, still that's not health science. I referenced it to the CZ article by the same name because I think that it's excellent, and, from what I've read of it - appropriately neutral. But as I write, or perhaps if you would care to add, more - i will try to make that clearer and try also to avoid an appearance of "picking" on any one field. Actually, at some point in the article I might -to truly present a neutral point of view, that some of health science is indisputably science, but yet does not translate neatly into effective therapy. Perhaps under research, giving sickle cell anemia as an example. In other words, some therapies are helpful even if we do not have a scientific explanation for why, and in some cases, we have a near perfect scientific explanation for a disease - yet no ready cure or effective remedy. Thanks, Nancy

I think the concept you have just been discussing is now being called "translational biology" or "translational biochemistry [etc]", where translational mean translating the scientific knowledge into practical health care. Not yet recognizeded in WP, by the way.DavidGoodman 20:20, 15 November 2006 (CST)

additional material from experts who are not from US needed

It would be helpful if experts from geographic areas outside the US would add to this article in terms of health science education, training, scope of practice. Additions could be made where relevant, and identified as being true of XX country. A section on "Health Sciences around the world" might be eventually formed, in which these - and references to US Health Science- would be moved. Nancy Sculerati MD 06:59, 19 November 2006 (CST)