Talk:Microdosing

I dispute the neutrality of this article, it reads more like a cross between an advert and anti-vivisectionist propaganda. I am not implying that this is junk science, just that the writing overstates the benefit of the technique Colostomyexplosion (talk) 11:51, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree and have removed many of the sections that I believe are promotional in nature. I recognise that i have added a lot of need citation tags but feel that without them unverified information might be given too much credence by a reader in an article that may be mainly promotion for a particular corporate interest or product.131.251.134.152 (talk)

Both external links are no longer valid. On the NC3R site, no such article can be found. Google did provide me with this link to EUMAPP http://www.ist-world.org/ProjectDetails.aspx?ProjectId=7b1c87e4641e4930a4dd1ea4dbae0a70&SourceDatabaseId=8a6f60ff9d0d4439b415324812479c31 It is on another site, more than 10 years old and I cannot verify it. If anyone with a better knowledge of these matters could change the links I'd be most grateful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.160.101.67 (talk) 12:38, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"It is expected that by 2010..."

How's that working out? · rodii · 13:18, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Science Writing

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 January 2024 and 10 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Yellowsunshine14 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Devonwinquist.

— Assignment last updated by Devonwinquist (talk) 17:03, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]