text:
User:JREverest/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge/2020-21/Seminar group 6/Evidence

Evidence in History
History is “(the study of or a record of) past events considered together” aiming to help understand the evolution of events and the reasoning behind past customs. Hence, the only way in which you can practice history is by looking into records of past events and connecting them so that they accurately represent what happened at a specific time. However, interpretation also plays an important part in historical enquiry due to how often there is missing or misleading information.

Ernst Bernheim (1889) proposed a historical methodology comprising of seven steps which aim to deal with ambiguous or absent sources, as well as to criticise the sources’ validity. However, what is currently more appealed to as a “manual” of historical methodology is Garraghan’s (1947) “A Guide to Historical Method”. These books answer questions around what happens when two sources contradict each other, how to interpret eyewitnesses’ claims and when to consider them, anonymous sources, et al. It is essential that there is a complete and sound methodology to evaluate evidence, given that history’s entire foundation revolves around it. The procedure must touch on all possible situations in which uncertainty occurs and express which is the best compromise. For example, this is how a mixture of Bernheim's and Garraghan's methodologies deal with the situations below :

Contradiction between sources
When sources evidently contradict each other, the most appropriate thing to do is to contest the authority of the claims in relation to who rendered them. Experts are usually more reliable than eyewitnesses, which makes them the preferred source. If there is no means of evaluating the sources' authority, the historians make their judgement based on which source best fits common sense.

Eyewitnesses
When considering an eyewitness’s account, there are many variables which must be taken into attention for the judgement of their claims to be sound. It is important to settle what are the intentions of the eyewitness, their way of expression (ironic, literal, etc.), if the statement is highly improbable in relation to the context or to human nature, etc.

Importance of Historical Revisionism in Interpretation
Historical revisionism, in the discipline of history, is the challenging of already established beliefs that are based on evidence. It revisits the inscribed interpretations in history books and tries to approach them from new positions – that is also what is happening today on creating a “new” history on the colonisation era by considering the opinions of the people who lived on the colonised lands prior to the arrival of Europeans. When historical evidence about a certain event or person is revisited with success, it creates a completely new take on the issue. An example is Annette’s Gordon-Reed's research on the relations between Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings – by interpreting the evidence about these two persons (she wrote about the fact that Jefferson and Hemings, a slave in his household, had a relationship lasting 38 years), Reed changed how these personalities are seen and what is their new significance within the U.S. history. Her take was not false portrayal of evidence but rather a new take on the history.

On the other hand, C. Behan McCullagh (2000) argues that false portrayal of historical evidence happens due to two reasons – either the historian has had a personal preference for a specific fact set (personal bias), or the evidence has been misunderstood by accident due to the society’s cultural bias. He states that in order to understand the evidence given correctly, the most important thing is a developed set of inquiry standards. However, academics in the discipline enjoy a certain level of personal or cultural bias in evidence since it allows them to come up with explanations for the proceedings in the past from a more sophisticated perspective giving an even better explanation for the previous events.

The Issue of Personal Diary Entries as Evidence in History
The information given in diaries (evidence) is both objectively descriptive and subjectively explanatory, meaning that it gives a very personalised experience of the historic event explained. Both historically and now, journalling is considered common practice that allows people to express in writing how they feel, what they see, explain their values and reasons for certain way of thought.

Within the context of history, diary is perceived as a memoir, a historic account, in which a person has written the thoughts it had experienced throughout a certain time period about the emotions and activities lived through. Since history is a social science (with the main aim to explore the socio-economic activities in the past and how these proceedings shaped the society into what it was then and how it came to be today), diaries are used as real-time evidence giving direct, but subjective explanations for past’s phenomena (and ensuring interaction between the subjective and direct element of the writer’s experience). And, mostly, historical diaries were written about experiences that were negative and humiliating. In history, personal journals are considered as primary sources – original perspectives on the researched happening from its actual time, and from these entries historians can draw new interpretations and further analysis.

But, by considering that diaries provide a unique and individual insight into the past events, it also poses an alarming problem – with the use of diaries as evidence, how can the researcher be fully sure that the information provided is truthful and scientific enough? When using diaries as evidence of events lived through, how can an academic determine that this written entry is acceptable to the standards of social science (i.e., that it does not exclude a particular race’s views, opinions), or how can the academic ensure that the information given is not just the outcome of the writer’s imagination? Although it would be hard for any professional from the history academia to answer these questions, diary entries are used nevertheless, since there are no other materials which, as stated by Irina Paperno (2004), could “reveal the tension between the opposites”. Yet, scholars should facilitate awareness about the one-sidedness of the material to understand the discourses provided.

The Limitations of Using Extrapolated Data as Evidence
Extrapolation is a method used to make predictions based on the trajectory of patterns from previously gathered data. Since in empirical experiments it would be impossible to test the behaviour of every particle/organism under every variable condition, extrapolation is a useful tool to make informed assumptions about the untested ranges of data.

While extrapolation can be reliable and an extremely useful tool, it comes with the risk that the extrapolated data is based on patterns rather than experimental data. There is never absolute certainty that in the untested ranges of data, particle/organism behaviour will follow the predicted pattern. Therefore, extrapolated data, while not entirely unfounded, can be potentially dubious information upon which to claim scientific confirmation of a theory.

An example of extrapolation’s uses and limitations can be found in its utilisation when trying to overcome ethical barriers in biological experiments. The effects of potentially harmful/toxic chemicals cannot be tested on humans for ethical and legal reasons, so animals (commonly rodents) are used as surrogate test subjects to gather evidence. As mammals and as an intelligent species, there are a lot of similarities in the biological, psychological, and physiological makeup between rats and humans. Along with the fact that they are small, cheap to breed, easy to genetically mutate, and share genes linked to genetic diseases in humans, rats are great test subjects that produce reliable data on the potential effects of new drugs on humans. Rats have been involved in the study of many now prevalent prescription medicines, including oxytocin and high cholesterol combatants. However, there are nuances between a rat’s and a human’s metabolic pathways, varying similarities in their reactions to and recovery from drugs, and laboratory techniques for inducing illnesses and injuries can influence the outcome of the data. In such cases, extrapolation is shown to not be a 100% reliable source of evidence for assuming the expected effects of drugs used on rats on humans.

Experiments as Scientific and Social Evidence
Evidence is a proven fact, that is used to demonstrate a statement. In many fields of knowledge, especially in the scientific and sociological fields, theorists rely their analysis on experiments, considered therefore as evidence.

The first traces of scientific experiments as part of the Scientific Method date from Ancient Egypt and Greek Antiquity. Indeed, with the apparition of the scientific discipline during Antiquity, some philosophers such as Plato believed scientific statements could only rely on knowledge. However, some thinkers like Aristotle, who was one of the first to take this position, argued all fields of knowledge should develop and rely on empirical evidence. At the same time, materialism current of thoughts developed in India. But the scientific method was then only based on observation and measurement, the last one brought by Aristotle.

The origins of experimental Scientific evidence
The ones to brought physical experimentation into the scientific method were the Muslims philosophers. They kept the basis of the Greek Methods but added experimentation, hypothesis, the explicit statement of a problem, the interpretation of data and the elaboration of a conclusion. All these new elements put together to contribute to the elaboration of a scientific method very close to the nowadays’ one, more precise than in the past, and reusable.

Of course, the scientific method was reborn during the Renaissance with new and even more precise ways of processing to deepen the scientific approach. The work of Galileo especially, was very useful in a sense that he realised the world around us, and its components were too unstable to apply perfectly on its theoretical principles elaborated in the past.

The Industrial Revolution with the contribution of scientists such as Newton has continued to deepen research methods in the various disciplines and has drawn from the theoretical and practical advances which have so far contributed to real scientific breakthroughs. Finally, nowadays, the Digital Revolution and its ever more advanced technological advances allow scientists to carry out ever more efficient and radical experiments to face ever more complex questions and understand the functioning of the organisms and physical elements that constitute our environment.

The origins of experimental Social evidence
In the context of psychological and sociological research, often used evidence are social experiments. Social experiments appeared later in History than scientific ones, and were extensively used during the 20th century. One of the firsts social experiments have happened during the second half of the 19th century, in 1895. It was conducted by American psychologist Norman Triplett, who found out that cyclists tend to bike faster when racing. He replicated the experiment in a laboratory setting and obtained similar results. Most of the experiments aimed to understand the social behaviour of individuals, how and why was the society constructed the way it was, and to understand the social evolution of human being.

For the highest possible validity, social experiments must fulfil certain conditions. Those include for example standardized procedures, replicability, large, representative sample, conduction of pilot test.

All the ethical restrictions put in place have contributed to fostering advances in the field of social experiences and make it hard for social scientists to be able to carry out and put into practice their theoretical statements.

Evidence In Law
Law is a discipline based on evidence and truth. However, often, when it comes to truth, everyone has a different perspective and we quickly come to the conclusion that truth is not a monopole: similarly, to Schrödinger’s cat in physics, truth in law can take different forms and there can be multiple truths. This is why evidence is so important in law to support an argument. In front of a court, evidence can take the form of a testimony, an exhibit, a documentary material or a demonstrative evidence.

Testimony:

According to USLegal, “A testimony is a statement made in a legal proceeding or legislative hearing by a witness while under oath”. . Here, a testimony is considered as an acceptable evidence in law in a certain situation that is defined and has prerequisites: it is made by a witness and while under oath. However, “testimony in the form of opinions or conclusions cannot be received, except from experts”, showing that law requires certain criteria to qualify a fact as “evidence” in the court room.

Exhibit:

An exhibit is “a document or object (including a photograph) introduced as evidence during a trial (copy of a paper attached to a pleading, any legal paper filed in a lawsuit, declaration, affidavit, or other document, which is referred to and incorporated into the main document”. [31]. Again, there are strict criteria as to what counts as evidence and what does not. For example: secondary evidence as to the content or intent of writings cannot be received. [32]

Documentary material or Demonstrative evidence:

“The term documentary materials is defined by 44 USCS § 2201 as all books, correspondence, memorandums, documents, papers, pamphlets, works of art, models, pictures, photographs, plats, maps, films, and motion pictures, including, but not limited to, audio, audiovisual, or other electronic or mechanical recordation’s”. [33] Hence, by creating strict rules, it ensures that the term “evidence” in law is specific which promotes its importance and utility in front of a court. This is important as for example: hearsay evidence cannot be received as evidence under this title in front of a court. . Hence, we see that depending on the discipline, evidence has a certain level of exclusivity and sets of rules that apply to reach the appellation of evidence.

Eyewitnesses in court: how memory can be altered and create inaccurate testimony?
One of the key kinds of evidence in law is eyewitness evidence. However, it has been argued for over a century that this type of evidence is not always reliable in court. Indeed, it is known that when a memory is revisited, emotions among other factors play a big part in its reconstruction, especially in its alteration. This can lead to inaccurate accusations during a trial. Bartletts theory on reconstructive memory, largely based on the research of Loftus and Palmer (1974) and the result of leading questions on eye witness testimony is just one example of how memory can be distorted and can therefore put into question the reliability of eyewitness testimonies in court. So should an uncertain process such as revisiting memory, influenced by many different factors, be able to choose someone's fate for the rest of its life?

In fact, due to wrong testimonies in the United States, about 375 prisoners spent on average 14 years in prison for an accusation that was proven wrong by a DNA test. However, in the judiciary system, eyewitnesses are considered very reliable. Most neuroscientists agreed “that memory is encoded in the patterns of synaptic connectivity between neurons”. This synaptic connection can be altered and thus shape future testimonies. Furthermore, there is the LTD (Long Term Depression), a phenomenon that reduces neural synapse efficiency. Such a phenomenon can damage memory. . This occurs during a simulation of the synapsis whenever someone is working with their memory, and lead to an improvement of the connection, and thus the memory, but also to a deterioration of the connection. Moreover, in others scenarios, when stress occurs, which is very common when individuals witness a crime, it can release hormones, such as epinephrine or cortisol during the arousal. It has been shown that during a high arousal stage, “memory encoding may be enhanced or impaired depending on the person's individual stress response.”.

Additionally, there are some bias that can alter the memory, such as the cross-race bias, when it comes to identifying someone from a different race, humans tend to struggle more and make the testimony less reliable. Therefore, it is easier for us to recognize a face from our race. Furthermore, Elizabeth Loftus, a cognitive psychologist and expert on human memory, conducted a study on the interaction between language and memory. She conducted it with 45 students. They had to watch a short film about a car accident. At the end of each one, they had to answer a few questions. One of them was to estimate the speed of the car during the collision. Indeed, every video showed a car that went at the same speed, the only difference was in the question. Mrs Loftus used different words when talking about the collision (hit, smashed...). The results have shown variability in the answers. This experiment shows us that the words used in a question can have an impact on the answer. Even though it is not possible at the moment to get into someone’s memory, it is essential to acknowledge that human memory is not fully reliable and therefore it is key that judges balance the weight they put into eyewitnessed evidence when making their final decision.

Forensic Evidence In Criminology
Evidence can be quite delicate to define: what makes something good enough to prove a point? What is proof based on: facts, knowledge, observation, or a bit of everything? Evidence has become crucial in supporting claims, advancing research, and problem solving. In the case of criminology, evidence can be under several forms: forensic evidence, expert evidence, circumstantial evidence, direct evidence, and primary and secondary evidence. Criminology is a discipline that englobes the scientific study of crime and criminal behavior: therefore, evidence is a pillar of this discipline. Specifically focusing on forensic evidence, obtained through scientific methods such as toxicology, ballistics, blood tests, fingerprints, anthropometry, maturation, and DNA tests, we can understand part of the role of evidence in this discipline.

Forensic evidence is critical: it helps determine the innocence or guiltiness of a person in a court case. Some evidence can be undisputable, and can allow the certainty of specific facts. Other pieces of evidence can be insufficient, and arguments can not be based solely on the information brought by the evidence. In the court of law, the analysis of forensic evidence is used to establish facts on the situation. However, there also exists evidence tampering or faulty results, so it is also up to the involved professionals to examine and determine if the evidence can be used as real proof or fact.

In the past 40 years, forensic evidence has greatly advanced with the development of technology and new techniques. Today, many new tools are still being developed, such as drones which allow 3D representations of crime scenes or accidents, leading up to a future with more and more accurate evidence.

However, forensic evidence can show some limits. In fact, forensic evidence implies two disciplines, Law and Science. These two disciplines use different approaches and constraints when talking about evidence. When forensic evidence is put forward, it's considered as the truth since it is scientific, however, a piece of scientific evidence does not necessarily mean the truth. Since it is possible that, for example, a DNA test is wrong. In 2005, Mitt Romney approached forensic evidence without taking into account the different constraints in the disciplines. Indeed, he only looked at it in the legal system and assumed they were the truth without any doubt. Thus, he decided to introduce a bill on legalizing again death penalty in Massachusetts, considering that scientific evidence will prevent every wrong conviction and did not consider any margin of error. So, forensic evidence is a very good improvement for the legal system. However, it is always important to look at the different disciplines and approaches within this issue in order to fully benefit from it, and not making it counterproductive.

Psychology - a 'real' science?
Psychology is defined as ‘the scientific study of behaviour and mental processes’, yet despite this definition, whether it qualifies as a science has been disputed since its conception. Much of this debate relates to research methods and by extension, evidence. As it follows the empirical method, a methodology characterised by the use of directly measurable or observable data, it is technically considered a science. However many scholars and members of the public alike argue that the object of psychological study in its broadest sense - the mind - is too abstract to be observed and measured in the same ways as other phenomena, and thus cannot be considered in the same vein as the natural sciences. Such individuals argue that psychological study at times evokes and attempts to answer metaphysical and ontological questions, which simply cannot be supported by concrete evidence. The conversation around psychology therefore provides an insight into what both individuals and entire disciplines believe constitutes evidence, and the role of evidence in the perceived validity of knowledge.

Despite there being no stipulation in the definition of evidence as to what type of information can provide support for an idea or theory according to distinguished dictionaries, what type of data has more validity and thus what evidence is more reliable is widely contested within academia. This is most commonly seen in the quantitative versus qualitative debate. Broadly speaking, those in favour of quantitative argue that numerical data provides a means to draw conclusions from large data sets which otherwise could not be analysed, whilst those in support of qualitative argue that conclusions should only be drawn from detailed analysis, otherwise researchers pose the risk of oversimplification. The former is often considered more rigorously scientific and the evidence more valid, whilst the latter can be treated as unscientific and the subsequent evidence ultimately less legitimate.

Whilst this is often considered an interdisciplinary debate, between the arts, the social sciences and the natural sciences, psychology provides a microcosm in which such polarisation can be observed due to the variable nature of the discipline. Unlike other disciplines, psychological research will differ markedly in methods depending on the needs and nature of the sub-field or even specific research question. Neuropsychology or biological psychology may call for quantitative research to provide evidence for a theory, meanwhile counselling psychology or personality psychology may call for more qualitative methods. Further, some approaches within psychology, namely the humanistic approach, reject the scientific method entirely. Most famously associated with Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow, psychologists who follow this philosophy instead stress the precedence an individual's subjective perception and understanding should take over empirical methods of enquiry. This interpretative approach to evidence and the consequent construction of knowledge differs significantly from the positivist approach generally taken by modern psychologists. In this way it can be ascertained that evidence is not rigidly defined in actual usage and is instead a subjective entity defined at a personal, departmental and disciplinary level.

Confirmation bias - Accuracy of evidence in psychological research
Evidence can be described as a way of concluding on the validity and credibility of information. Disciplines in the human sciences such as psychology, use research with the purpose of allowing them to interpret events, observations and thoughts leading to the common purpose of understanding societal occurrences. Primary research such as research studies in psychology are considered a form of evidence within the discipline. This evidence is then used to make models and predictions which are used to deal with complex real-life ideas. This can be demonstrated by looking at the Multi Store Memory Model. Research regarding the serial position curve in studies such as Glanzer and Cunitz (1966) have been the driving force of modelling the multi store approach to memory which is used to explain brain functions and predict how the human brain works. Therefore, we can observe studies such as Glanzer and Cunitz are used as evidence to come to conclusions in psychology, however, some may argue issues might arise with relying so heavily on human controlled evidence.

Confirmation bias, a process by which researchers involuntarily mis-interpret results by adapting them to their personal beliefs or ideas, is a phenomenon which has been proven to appear in many psychology research studies. Peter Wason was one of the first researchers to explore the topic of bias in the 1960s and used his “2-4-6” experiment to show this. His research consisted of asking individuals to identify a rule in the number sequence he proposed. It was observed that participants answered with sequences which confirmed their personal hypothesis of what they thought Wason´s rule was, rather than trying to falsify their hypothesis by using opposing or different sequences. Some argue confirmation bias is an easy path our brain uses to process new evidence as it is easier to confirm what we believe is right than to process new complex evidence. Others argue it is a matter of confirming one’s own hypothesis unconsciously and trying to falsify any other alternative ones. However, if confirmation bias is identified in psychological research, what does this imply about the evidence used to make predictions and assumptions.

It is argued confirmation bias can lead to a distortion of evidence. If a conclusion is made precipitately it might ignore the opportunity for other results to arise or for further exploration, possibly leading to the formation of misguided conclusions. Even when an effort is made to control biased collection of evidence through methods such as random allocation, systematic errors can be introduced from much earlier, such as in the design of the experiment or execution of the proposed method. We can apply these thoughts to research within psychology. Impulsive and premature conclusions can lead to misguided evidence causing the establishment of wrong predictions and models to be developed within the discipline. This creates scepticism on the accuracy of evidence and is something we should consider when exploring psychological research. Exploring this idea on a broader level, it is possible to analyse other research related disciplines which also base conclusions on evidence. These disciplines may experience the same questioning on the validity of evidence given the possibility of confirmation bias and might therefore have to consider whether evidence should be as dependently relied on to form conclusions within their disciplines.

Use of evidence in Management
Management is an academic discipline within social sciences. Some of its focuses include setting up strategies for an organisation based on its various available resources to achieve specific goals. University proposes various degrees within Management, such as Bachelor of Business Administration (BBA), Master of Management (MScM or MIM) or Doctor of Management (DM), Doctor of Business Administration (DBA).

Evidence-based management
In recent years evidence-based management (EBMgt) movement has been gaining popularity, as a part of a general movement for evidence-based practice, advocating that practises should draw on scientific evidence. Evidence-based management has three pillars and strives for decision-making and setting up an organisational strategy based on the best available evidence. Evidence in the context of evidence-based management means either quantitive, qualitative or descriptive information. Mention main principles include published peer-reviewed research evidence, managemental judgment in experience, values and preferences of concerned people. Evidence is drawn from scientific research in published academic journals usually focuses on management and social sciences journals, which provides a critical evaluation of specific management practice. This may include information on whether financial incentives improve employees commitment and motivation, or evaluation of merger success rate. Evidence may come from organisational data, and this can range from quantitive data such as financial data and market share, or qualitative information such as an organisation's culture perception. Experimental evidence is characterised by accumulated overt time reflections on relatively similar actions and comes from practitioners. Other forms of evidence include stakeholder evidence, which reflects the concerns and values of individuals or groups that may be affected by the organisation's actions.

Evidence-based practice in interdisciplinary healthcare
Evidence-based practice

Evidence-based practice in healthcare focuses on using the best research evidence that is available, along with clinical expertise and consideration of the individual patient, to deliver patient care. The term evidence-based medicine was first introduced in 1991 and is defined as “the conscientious, explicit, and judicious use of current best evidence in making decisions about the care of individual patients.” The term evidence-based medicine then evolved into evidence-based practice, in order to emphasise the need to make use of medical evidence in actual clinical practice. In 2005, the Sicily statement on evidence-based practice was published which defined evidence-based practice as requiring that “decisions about health care are based on the best available, current, valid and relevant evidence.

Interdisciplinary healthcare

Interdisciplinary teams in healthcare are those comprising of a range of healthcare professionals from different backgrounds, working together to deliver high quality patient care. In complex patient problems, multiple disciplines are required to share information with each other and an interdisciplinary approach in healthcare can lead to more effective services and improved problem-solving capability. Studies show that when teams of people from different disciplines work together, they can provide better patient care outcomes, which can be seen as the main reason for utilising an interdisciplinary approach in healthcare. It is therefore important to understand how to adopt the best interdisciplinary approach.

We can bring together the existing knowledge from health and management, to better understand how to collaborate between professions. In business management it is known that as the number of people in the team increase, more specialised teams need to be created to make efficient use of skills and people. Each team is then led by a different manager who is focused on their own team rather than the organisation as a whole. This leads to issues in teams duplicating their efforts or not working in the most efficient way. There is the idea of a “silo”, or a department, in which information is freely shared within that silo, but not with others. This means that different departments will make decisions based solely on the information that is available to them, which may not provide the complete picture. Healthcare professionals often find themselves working in “uniprofessional silos”, which means that sharing information between professions is difficult.

Conflict in generation and use of evidence

In an interdisciplinary approach, aside from the lack of sharing of evidence, there is also often conflict in how this evidence is used in different disciplines. There is disagreement on how to use this evidence to generate guidelines for the best evidence-based practice and how these guidelines are adopted. The Institute of Medicine emphasises the need for evidence, and for this information to be used to provide guidance on: how to translate evidence into practice, how to deliver interdisciplinary evidence-based education, as well as to guide practice itself. The Council for Training in Evidence-Based Behavioral Practice (EBBP) was set up to support collaboration across health disciplines, and includes experts from medicine, nursing psychology, social work, public health and library sciences. The inclusion of both scientists and non-scientists in this council brings forward the added dimension of being trans-disciplinary. The EBBP model describes how evidence in healthcare can be provided by primary researchers who generate the evidence in the first instance. Evidence synthesisers, such as the Cochrane Collaboration, can then use research studies to generate systematic reviews. Information from systematic reviews can then be used, for example, by the US Preventive Services Task force, in preventive services, or to make guidelines and recommendations. The EBBP model was developed after a review of existing evidence-based models from different disciplines, stating that clinical decisions need to be made based on the best available evidence.

Case study of homeopathy

In homeopathy, we can see an example of how conflict arises, due to the ways in which evidence is generated and used. Homeopathy is a holistic approach to medicine. It uses mainly natural sources; thus, it is considered as an herbal medicine also known as a Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) by the World Health Organisation. Despite homeopathy’s rising popularity, it is often challenged regarding its efficiency, as its core concepts are contradictory with the ideas of modern medicine which uses an allopathic approach. Indeed, homeopathy uses a method based on the “like cures like”. It suggests that a certain substance which can cause harmful consequences in large quantities could also be used to treat those same symptoms with a very small dose of the substance. The whole principle of homeopathy is therefore based on the high dilution of a base substance.

There is an on-going debate about whether or not to trust homeopathy. The question of whether is is an effective method often is raised. Also, at the heart of the debate is the role of evidence and more particularly, the question of what counts as evidence in medicine.

Evidence based medicine depends strongly on statistical methods to prove the efficiency of a drug and clinical experiments which are then applied to a whole population. It also relies and privileges one way of experimentation being the Randomized Controlled Trials RCT. In this context, homeopathy lacks statistical relevancy. This is mostly due to the fact that homeopathy is used differently depending on the homeopath and the patient, therefore the type of treatment can change from patient to patient with the same symptoms. Thus, the core difference between evidence based medicine and homeopathy is the standardisation against an individualisation of treatments. Hence, the complexity of researching data in a quantitative way for homeopathy and other CAM. Evidence produced in regards to CAM are often questioned for their reliability, in regards to the methodology used to produce the evidence. Indeed, there is a wide variety of methodologies used in assessing the data for CAM which are not comparable between each other, as their boundaries are frequently unclear or are not recognised research methodologies in conventional medicine. It is also worth mentioning the fact that the data is not always published officially due to different policies in various countries, and this generates more debates.

Moreover, in evidence based medicine, the application of clinical results to a whole population (generalisation of health care) is also questioned with the example of rare diseases. These illnesses usually have little to no clinal research and therefore require a more qualitative approach in order to be treated, thus demonstrating the need to overcome the barriers imposed by using solely quantitative methods, and include qualitative methods as evidence as well. This reenforces the argument provided by homeopathy, for a more qualitative approach in evidence based medicine.


text:
User talk:Hudsonvalley12

 * Hello Hudsonvalley12! Thank you for your comments on my paragraph and your advice. You are welcomed to add your example on the Taoist culture and deeper explanations on our shift from environmental rituals to environmental sciences.

Moreover, your question about the link between feminism, post war/pacific and civil war movements; and environmental awareness made me realise how vaguely I explained it so I will add more details and you can tell me what you think of it (if it is clearer). Of course, these movements were not the only supporters of the environmental movement but I thought they were more interesting to mention. However, I plan on adding more obvious examples such as the creation of different academic societies asking for more environmental studies. Romarinlavende (discuss • contribs) 13:04, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User talk:Hudsonvalley12


text:
User:Legrandherbage/sandbox

Defining the discipline of History
History is a discipline that "studies the chronological record of events (as affecting a nation or people), based on a critical examination of source materials and usually presenting an explanation of their causes” The study of this discipline is notably the work of specialists called historians.

The role of historians
Historians collect and analyze relevant sources about major past events. Their first role is to understand that an event has taken place or, conversely, that it has not. Only then do they try to explain the different causes and consequences of this event. Their historical inquiry is a way to help us understand out today's world. The main difficulty of their work is to be completely neutral and objective as each event is a construction of the past for the historian. It thus lead to various contradictions and divergencies about what happened exactly. A relevant example of this situation is the famous debate around the origins of the First World War where consensus seems impossible.

Evidences in the discipline of History
Evidence is fundamental in the disciplines of History. Without it, it would be impossible for historians to recount the past because without evidence that an event took place at a given time, no research is carried out. In this discipline, evidences are called historical sources and contains relevant information about the past. They can either be private or public. their interpretation is a huge part of the work of historians since they have to be studied in completely different contexts. There is a distinction between primary and secondary sources, although some sources can be categorized differently depending on the context in which they are analyzed. A primary source is often more reliable and is defined as a source of information created in the past and more precisely at the time that is of interest to the historians concerned. Manuscripts or diaries are good examples. A secondary source in History complements the primary sources. It cites and comments on the past but is created in the present. Modern books or scholarly journals correspond to this definition.

title: User:Legrandherbage/sandbox


text:
User talk:Edcolins

Welcome, Edcolins!

If you have any questions, you can ask in the assistance reading room or possibly contact me personally. —Atcovi (Talk - Contribs) 14:54, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you! --Edcolins (discuss • contribs) 11:14, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

title: User talk:Edcolins


text:
User:LGreg/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge (LG seminar 2020/21)/Seminar 18/Evidence/Evidence in history

Defining the discipline of history
History is a discipline that "studies the chronological record of events (as affecting a nation or people), based on a critical examination of source materials and usually presenting an explanation of their causes”. The study of this discipline is notably the work of specialists called historians.

A further definition of history as a discipline is that it uses the written word to debate the nature of its own discipline as a way of providing perspective and evidence on the current day.

The role of historians
Historians collect and analyze relevant sources about major past events. Their first role is to understand that an event has taken place or, conversely, that it has not. Only then do they try to explain the different causes and consequences of this event. Their historical inquiry is a way to help us understand our today's world. The main difficulty of their work is to be completely neutral and objective as each event is a construction of the past for the historian. It thus leads to various contradictions and divergences about what happened exactly. A relevant example of this situation is the famous debate around the origins of the First World War where consensus seems impossible. To this difficulty of neutrality can be added the debate surrounding the reconstruction or reinterpretation of certain historical events that did not occur. Many people are therefore asking themselves the following question: should we allow certain people to reinvent the past at the risk of destroying the work of historians?

Evidences in the discipline of history
Evidence is fundamental in the discipline of history. Without it, it would be impossible for historians to recount the past because without evidence that an event took place at a given time, no research is carried out. In this discipline, evidences are called historical sources and contains relevant information about the past. They can either be private or public. Their interpretation is a huge part of the work of historians since they have to be studied in completely different contexts. There is a distinction between primary and secondary sources, although some sources can be categorized differently depending on the context in which they are analyzed. A primary source is often more reliable and is defined as a source of information created in the past and more precisely at the time that is of interest to the historians concerned. Manuscripts or diaries are good examples. A secondary source in history complements the primary sources. It cites and comments on the past but is created in the present. Modern books or scholarly journals correspond to this definition.


text:
User talk:Nicola.georgiou/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge/Seminar group 13/ Evidence

Evidence within Art History
I uploaded the picture of Van Gogh Starry Night, I hope that's okay!

I'm guessing that the picture of Picasso you are referring to is Guernica. I found a picture on Wiki Commons but it's not focused on the painting. I'll upload it here and you can tell me if you would like to see it in your article.

By the way in your last paragraph, one of the links doesn't work > it loads up a page that says 'bad title'

Xx Alwayslearningmore (discuss • contribs)
 * Hello, thank you for the picctures it really adds to the article nicely. Also, thank you for pointing out the links that didnt work, I have now fixed then so they should all be fine. The only problem I am having is in uploading the picture of Guernica as I dont know how to do it, I would appreciate it if someone who knows how to do it could add it to the section. Thank you.Ethan.dawson101 (discuss • contribs) 16:15, 10 October 2020 (UTC)

Digital Evidence
Hello MacabreRoses, I enjoyed reading your entry and saw you mentioned the new challenges that have arisen within Law since the development of digital evidence. I was wondering whether you might care to place more emphasis on the relation between a discipline (Law, most likely) and digital evidence. What does Law consider to be evidence? How then, is digital evidence relevant to Law's vision of evidence? Unadorablemensonge (discuss • contribs) 15:38, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello Unadorablemensonge! I am delighted to know that you enjoyed reading my entry this week! I also find the questions you posed very interesting; however, my entry is mainly focused on the definition of "digital evidence" as well as the challenges it may present, and consequently - the interdisciplinary solutions required. Focusing mainly on the relationship between "law" and "digital evidence" would change the entire concept of my contribution, making its focus something completely different from what I intended it to be. Also, as you might have noticed, the page has an entire section "The Law of Evidence" - dedicated to the relationship between Law and evidence, as well as to what is, in fact, considered evidence in a legislative context. Focalising on the subject in a second category might prove to be repetitive and could make the page in its entirety look less coordinated. Macabre Roses (discuss • contribs) 17:04, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

EBM - Evidence-based medicine
Hello, I thought this article was very clear, precise and well organised. I think it was easy to read for anyone whithout any specific knowledge of the subject. However, I was thinking of adding a reference to the second sentence which stated that EMB has philosophical roots. I hope this helps !

Thank you so much for your feedback, I am glad you were able to understand it easily! I will add the reference.

Introduction and Conclusion
Hello everyone! Last week we received an email from our seminar leader, suggesting that and introduction and a conclusion would be a great addition to our page as a whole. If anyone who hasn't written a contribution yet, finds it interesting, they could try to unify the content of the page by leading the reader into it with an introduction and eventually writing a short conclusion.Macabre Roses (discuss • contribs) 17:34, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I have charged myself with the introduction, and I kindly ask someone to conclude. Macabre Roses (discuss • contribs) 00:23, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi! Thank you for your contribution, the introduction effectively leads into the rest of the article. I have just added a conclusion, which I hope will tie the page together. Unadorablemensonge (discuss • contribs) 11:23, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much both for the introduction and conclusion! They both read really well and I think tie the whole page together nicely. Edgeofdawn (discuss • contribs) 11:34, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for writing the conclusion! It is coming together nicely this week. Macabre Roses (discuss • contribs) 17:13, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Structure
Hi! I'm not quite sure why the titles under evidence within disciplines have been put within quotation marks so I've removed them. If there's a reason why they're there I'm happy to change it back! Bfevidal (discuss • contribs) 11:16, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I've also switched the titles to non-italicised because I'm not sure if it's supposed to be like that Bfevidal (discuss • contribs) 11:20, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Hello, I'm not sure why they were italicised either, but I do think that if we do not italicise under Evidence in Different Disciplines, we should remove the italics in the other parts as well for it to be more consistent. I will attempt to change that now, and am happy to listen to any other suggestions towards ameliorating the overall structure of the page. (i.e. if certain parts should indeed be italicised, or changed to a different format) Unadorablemensonge (discuss • contribs) 11:27, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Evidence in Cartography
Hi I really enjoyed this specific contribution to the article. I found the little introduction and justification of Cartography as a discipline very needed and clear. I think that the reason why I enjoyed this paragraph so much is how it manages to really confuse the distinction that has been created between qualitative and quantitative evidence. As in because, ultimately cartography uses quantitative measurements and distances to create maps, however the use of these qualitative information then goes through a subjective process of selection where the appropriate data is used and presented in a map depending on what it’s purpose, as you clearly state with the Mercator Project being a sailing map. Thus, we get a more complex synergy between qualitative and quantitative evidence, showing how it all is not just black and white. However, my question regarding this paragraph is the idea of maps as primary or secondary evidence and how could we classify them in any of these two categories since they are technically both?Ethan.dawson101 (discuss • contribs) 14:45, 9 November 2020 (UTC)


text:
User:LGreg/sandbox/Approches to Knowledge (LG seminar 2020/21)/Seminar 18/History/History of Ballet

The markers of ballet's founding
Ballet is a form of dance that came back from the Italian Renaissance, which occurred in the 15th and 16th centuries. Ballet emerged during noble receptions. People who were mastering dance were learning some steps to the others, and the court participated in some performances.

Around the 16th century, an Italian noblewoman named Catherine de Medici, married to the French King Henry II, imported Ballet from Italy to France. She began to organize festivals, which encouraged court Ballet's development where music, decors, costumes were in the spotlight.

King Louis XVI was passionate about Ballet and performed numerous roles like the Sun King in "Ballet de la Nuit." He popularizes Ballet by creating in 1661 the Royal Academy of Dance in Paris. That is when Ballet went from a pastime activity to a discipline requiring professional training. 1668 is also a big step for Ballet's world because it moved from the court (palace ballrooms) to the stage. This discipline was opening to a broader population range and wasn't reserved for the high society anymore.

Jean Georges Noverre is an essential figure of ballet development. He believed Ballet could be an artistic discipline with dramatic movements, expressions, and relationships between characters. He fought for his ideas and, therefore, inaugurated "ballet d'action" (action ballet): a narrative form of Ballet, that became more popular in the 19th century.

Why can ballet be considered as a discipline?
A discipline can be defined as a subject where there is a transfer of ideas and points of view, a framework, different ways of thinking, and an adapted vocabulary.

The Royal Academy of Dance is the first dance institution that ever opened. It created a Ballet framework and allowed it to become an art that could be spread from one person to another with specific rules set up by the Academy.

A transfer of knowledge occurred when one person shared his or her expertise about Ballet with another one. For example, how to do some dance steps, or how to dance with musicality. When ballet masters began to choreograph some representations, they started to exchange ideas, developed their ways of thinking about Ballet, and they began to name the steps, hence creating a vocabulary around Ballet.

Key moments of change and how it has changed
In the 19th century, the romantic movement spread to the world of art and culture, thus to Ballet. At that time, the representations were telling fairy-tail stories, with magical and supernatural themes, while women were incarnating delicacy and passivity.

Marie Taglioni, daughter of Filippo Taglioni, transformed the world of Ballet. As she didn't have the correct physic and posture, she trained hours per day to align her posture with Greek statues. In the meantime, Ballet was pushed in "two seemingly opposite directions: simplicity and virtuosity." When Marie Taglioni began at the Royal Academy of dance in 1827, she has been recognized as the person that revolutionized Ballet. Her movements were mixing old moves and modern ones. Her role in "la Sylphide" through the Romantique period marked a significant turning point in the ballet world. While men were for a long time, the principal characters, since Marie Taglioni's arrival, women were at the center stage (4). She was also the first to perform in point shoes ("type of shoe where dancers are standing on their toes).

Russian classical Ballet emerged in St Petersburg after the romantic period from a strong French influence. As well as in Russia ballet spread to England, where the Royal Ballet opened in 1926 thanks to the famous choreographer Sir Frederich Ashton and well-known ballerina Dame Margot Fonteyn. A few years later, the Royal Academy of dance was reformed as the Paris Opera Ballet. In America, it took a bit more time; Ballet became popular when Georges Balanchine came to America to open his own dance company.

In the 20th, Ballet became more and more appreciated, popular, and accessible. Different dance styles arise from it, including contemporary dance (fusion of classical Ballet with modern dance), neoclassical (a more flexible and expansive version of Ballet that has been stripped from its theatrical and narrative nature). Ballet has reinvented itself and is now more focused on performance and technique than on the dance itself. Thanks to the new dancers and new choreographers like Maurice Bejart or Benjamin Millepied, Ballet evolves and changes. As they learn and master ballet's knowledge and Ballet's history, choreographer or dancers manage to developed new ideas, ways of thinking, or even a new era in the world of Ballet, by combining Ballet with another discipline, for example.

Lately, Ballet became mainstream; it is taught in the whole world and has been very publicized. Thanks to the movie Billie Eliott or The Black Swann that helped Ballet shine in the world.


text:
User:Chopsticks21/sandbox

Evidence in biology
In science in general, evidence is key to backing up all the scientific theories that surround us and try to make sense of all the phenomenons happening everywhere, all the time. But as these theories are only suggested by researchers, they need to be tested to collect evidence. The more evidence collected, by the more different people, the better.

Scientific evidence is used in three main different ways. It can be a link -strongest link being a “cause/consequence” link, allowing for instance to predict the behaviour of a similar event-, a difference -data used as evidence that something isn’t the same as something else (different characteristics/reactions/etc.)- or a change -establishes something’s change within time.

With these results and these different uses of evidence/data, one can solidify a scientific theory or, on the contrary prove it is wrong, generating what is called a paradigm change.

Darwinism
One major example of a paradigm change in the history of biology is the Darwinian paradigm. Darwin’s evolutionary theory justifies the diversity of life by the process of natural selection. At the time, it caused a real disruption in the way people saw evolution, therefore impacting their way of thinking about the evolution of humans which was very controversial as opposed to the Bible's explanation of the apparition of humans, thus perceived by some as “an attack of traditional values”. Charles Darwin presented his theory in 1859 in On the origin of species.To back up his theory he used multiple different experimentations and observations - such as the notorious finches of the Galapagos islands possessing a large variety of shapes and sizes of beaks, accomplishing multiple functions that Darwin saw as a proof of the effect of natural selection on these different species according to the island they were one and its environment, requiring different beak qualities -all these observations forming solid scientific evidence to back up his evolutionary theory; a theory adopted in most parts of the world today.

The Origin of Life
Stanley Miller’s experiment in 1953 was also an important event in the history of biology's paradigm changes, as it offered a new explanation of the origin of life on earth (based on scientific evidence), triggering the growth of research in this field. “Life” is not easy to define. Christopher Chyba and Carol Cleland (two astrobiologists) even said in the Origins of Life and Evolution of the Biosphere that trying to define it would be a mistake, as the knowledge about life is too small to impose an actual definition on it. A list of common characteristics of life on Earth can however, still be established; life’s essence is chemical, information is transmitted from one generation to the next by molecules, life exploits thermodynamic disequilibrium, biomolecules interact with water, and living systems have emerged as the result of random variations and natural selection.

In 1953, Stanley Miller’s experiment concluded that the environment most likely to have hosted the development of life was a “primordial soup”. Since then however, more evidence collected in different experiments have suggested that life wasn’t developed in such an environment but rather in black smokers or, more recently, alkaline vents. The need for more evidence is therefore always needed in this scientific domain, always backing up certain theories or proving that others are wrong, contributing to the ever-evolution of the theories of the origin of life, which is aplicable for all biological domains in general.

title: User:Chopsticks21/sandbox


text:
User talk:SteRos7/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge/Seminar 2/Evidence

General
Ideas for the order of the page this time, perhaps moving from the more general to the more specific, or moving from the natural sciences end of the spectrum to the humanities again? --Oliveoilandgarlic (discuss • contribs) 13:32, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi, I agree with you! We should do maybe an order that has some sense for example: The article on 'Consciousness' before the 'Study of Dreams'. We could put the 'Evidence in Neurology' after these two previous ones as they support it with more information?
 * Tell me what you think!
 * --Qenalcu (discuss • contribs) 10:51, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Agreed, how about this for an order:

 * 1	Evidence in Consciousness
 * 2	Evidence in the Study of Dreams
 * 3	Evidence in Neurology
 * 4	Forensic Evidence: Investigation of Sexual Assaults
 * 5	Evidence in Science
 * 6	Issues and evidence in the prescription of pharmaceutical drugs
 * 7	Evidence in sociology
 * 8	Evidence in cartography

 * Or the reverse of the above order, I'm not sure how the more social science based articles are best fitted in, as I've put it it moves from the philosophical to the natural sciences and then away from them into the social sciences. What does everyone think?
 * --Oliveoilandgarlic (discuss • contribs) 11:03, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes perefect! Thanks.--Qenalcu (discuss • contribs) 11:08, 29 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi! After a few weeks, we can see new contributions and there is a need to fit them in somewhere. I would try to keed the order "from sciences to humanities" throughout our sandbox.

Therefore, I do not know if it is not too late, but I would suggest this order:

 * 1) Evidence in Mathematics
 * 2) Issues of Evidence in the Prescription of Pharmaceutical drugs
 * 3) Evidence in Neurology
 * 4) Evidence in Science
 * 5) Evidence in cartography
 * 6) Forensic Evidence: Investigation of Sexual Assaults
 * 7) Evidence in Consciousness
 * 8) Evidence in the Study of Dreams
 * 9) Evidence in law
 * 10) Evidence in sociology

Let me know what you think.

Good order however I would suggest that sociology is more of a social science than law which is more of a pure humanity so would argue that they should be swapped in order. I have done my section on Evidence in Film Studies and Criticism so would put that right at the end as it's humanities edging towards the arts and probably the least science based of the bunch. I'll swap the law and sociology round now if that's ok with everyone Apricotptr (discuss • contribs) 16:22, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Looking now I can see the orders a bit messed up so if we want to keep it as beginning from sciences to humanities can i suggest this order:

 * 1) Evidence in Science
 * 2) Evidence in the Prescription of Pharmaceutical drugs
 * 3) Evidence in Neurology
 * 4) Evidence in Consciousness
 * 5) Evidence in the Study of Dreams
 * 6) Evidence in Sociology
 * 7) Forensic Evidence: Investigation of Sexual Assault
 * 8) Evidence in Law
 * 9) Evidence in Cartography
 * 10) Evidence in Film Studies and Criticism Apricotptr (discuss • contribs) 16:34, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Evidence in Science

 * A comment on your arguement about the biases of genecists - I would argue that you need more than two peices of anacdotal evidence to back up the claim that 'each individual approaches the evidence with their own backgrounds, values and intentions and use these to then form their own, often polarising, opinions on the given information'. I would argue that the majority of genetic scientists, and even scientists engaged in human genetics, which do very often have issues with political biases, are able to conduct research scientificcally without their personal biases getting in the way, and that most biased work would be filtered out by the peer review process.
 * What do you think @Driedmangoes
 * --Oliveoilandgarlic (discuss • contribs) 18:42, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

Evidence in Sociology
Your argument is very universal and could be applied to any other field of social sciences. The first, introductory paragraph is too long and mentions general points, relevant but not essential for your work. It is a good idea to investigate evidence in sociology, however, you could write more about the specific types of evidence and define them into qualitative or quantitative evidence. Moreover, you have no citations. It is useful to add the sources that you have used.

I found a few sources that could be helpful to develop your point:
 * https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/43929447/Qvalitative_Research_Sociology2.pdf?1458506771=&response-content-disposition=inline%3B+filename%3DQualitative_Research_in_Sociology.pdf&Expires=1603715988&Signature=K7Kb7F34hf~wl4his8obbRgPE4pTCfdBqf4jXDKR95VyIgGArqFnX1ddXiNmO8XJm6nf3eoMNjgl2r0IA3O9XXpvRgYF97gzzdChSTenBfVj7asaNLFf3vFDnTgQkToL7s7UTfFNb9G7Kr~6rMmX5PKLKoOtkqfUG4-MWY9ZBx7H~aZzoVgTrMPA2n4UQC3~y1l1sPMUQkTfqU7sfiuTYXCPsTLwP5-5dsBmowD6l-GRqmjDRYgEk-MhANxBA6qPUaZYDAX53k8nwMpFrB7UU0SkAf6vRgp8qTC7Q8WvftHHEvJChZGV6yrhzkOARLAYBJ56JCBC4vKQgGf595qovQ__&Key-Pair-Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA
 * http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/view/17
 * https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs12108-008-9042-1
 * https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0038038596030003010

I hope it helps.

--Grammaloretoo (discuss • contribs) 11:43, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Evidence in Cartography
I also find it interesting to talk about the fact that some people are voluntarily moving away from this desire to create the most realistic and objective map possible. This new type of map is called a “subjective map” and is made by residents who want to create a map that looks like how they perceive their city or region. They can be based on impressions, myths in the region, a personal perception of a place… More generally, since a map is partly abstract, one may wonder whether it is completely objective at some point. Its author choose what he will make appear or not, the colors choose may have an influence on how the reader will perceive certain places etc.

There is a book about it if anyone is interested : http://descomp.scripts.mit.edu/www/_main_dir_link/images_projects/takehiko_01/xiaoji_map/xioji_seeing_differently_small_final.pdf

--Write&Leave (discuss • contribs) 19:58, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Forensic Evidence: Investigation of Sexual Assaults
I would like to add that the extensive use of forensic evidence when investigating sexual assaults has created a lot of controversy in the last months, especially in France. Indeed, on the 14th of October 2020, the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme court of appeal has decided that in order for a sexual assault to be considered a rape the penetration needs reach a certain depth, intensity and duration. However, to obtain these details about the assault, forensic evidence is needed. This decision has caused high amounts of controversy and therefore shows us that the extensive use of forensic evidence in cases of sexual assault is now creating debate as some argue there are now too many biological requirements for a sexual assault to be considered rape.

The article that details this criminal case can be found on this link, however, it is in french. https://entreleslignesentrelesmots.blog/2020/11/06/un-viol-vaginal-doit-etre-suffisamment-profond-ou-quand-la-cour-de-cassation-marche-sur-la-tete/


text:
History of video games/Platforms/Entex Select-A-Game

History
The Entex Select-A-Game was released in 1981 for $54.99. Unlike most portable consoles of the time, it was designed to be used with two players, but could also be used by a single person.

The use of games that were clear clones of other games on the console caused significant legal issues for Entex.

Technology
Like many systems of the time, the CPU is located in game cartridges.

The Entex Select-A-Game uses a Vacuum Florescent Display (VFD) with a resolution of 7 by 16 oval elements that could display red and white.

The system used 4 C batteries.

Notable games

 * Space Invader 2
 * Pacman 2
 * Baseball 4
 * Football 4
 * Basketball 3
 * Pinball

External Resources

 * Video Game Kraken - Entex Select-A-Game page.
 * Handheld Museum - Entex Select-A-Game page.


text:
Korean/Determiners

Korean Determiners

Determiners are particles attached to nouns in order to determine their function in a sentence, often denoting subjects and objects (direct and indirect). Determiners in Korean are slightly dependent on the final sound of the noun.

~는/~은 are the particles used to determine the subject of a sentence, or the one doing the action. "~는" is used whenever the final sound of a noun is a consonant, while its converse, "~은" is used whenever the final sound of a noun is a vowel.

E.g.(저는 집에 갑니다.) Literally: I (subj.) house to-go.

~를/~을 are the particles used to determine the direct object of a sentence. "~를" is used when the final sound of a noun is a vowel, while "~을" is used when the final sound of a noun is a consonant. E.g( 저는 나의 숙제를 하겠어요.)

Literally: I (subj.) my homework will-do.

~에게/~한테 are often used to determine the indirect object of a sentence. Despite both being grammatically correct, ~한테 is used far more often, as ~에게 is sometimes deemed "too formal" in many situations.

E.g (저한테 그 책을 주세요.) Literally: I (in.obj.) that-book give.

title: Korean/Determiners


text:
History of video games/Platforms/TV Tennis Electrotennis

Launch
TV Tennis Electrotennis was released by Epoch on September 12th, 1975 at a cost of either ¥19,000 yen or ¥19,500 yen. The TV Tennis Electrotennis was the first Japanese video game console.

Sales figures
Most sales figures for the TV Tennis Electrotennis are in the ballpark of around 10,000, to 20,000 consoles sold.

The German website Gamona even goes so far as to say the console could have sold over three million units, though this source notes that they were unsure of this claim.

Influences
The ability for the TV Tennis Electrotennis to broadcast television signals inspired Famicom and NES designer Masayuki Uemura to consider adding a similar wireless broadcast function to the Famicom, though this was not pursued due to cost.

TV Tennis Electrotennis (テレビテニス) is also known by its affectionate nickname "Pon Tennis" (ポンテニス).

Technology
As the name suggests, the TV Tennis Electrotennis could only play tennis. The system broadcast a television signal over a UHF antenna and ran on batteries so it did not need to be plugged into anything to work.

External Resources

 * Game Medium - TV Tennis Electrotennis page.
 * Super Gaijin Ultra Gamer - TV Tennis Electrotennis page.


text:
History of video games/Platforms/Coleco Telstar series

Development
Coleco was founded as the Connecticut Leather Company in west Hartford Connecticut in 1932 by Maurice Greenberg, a Russian immigrant.

The Coleco Telstar was devised as a home version of Pong in 1975. Shortly after product design began, Leonard Greenberg of Coleco discovered that home pong style games already existed.

Much of the Coleco Telstar had to be redesigned in a week to meet an FCC deadline, after they failed their first FCC compliance test. Coleco quickly signed a licensing agreement with Magnavox to consult with Ralph Baer, who successfully got the radio interference of the Telstar under control.

At least some units were made in the United States of America.

Launch

The first Coleco Telstar console was released in 1976 at a cost of $50 with the capability of playing Hockey, Tennis, and Handball. In 1976 over a million Coleco Telstars sold due to it's low price, which was about half of what competitors charged. Still sales were considerably hampered by a strike and material shortage at the critical lead up to the 1977 Christmas season.

In 1977 the Coleco Telstar deluxe was released exclusively for the Canadian market.

The Coleco Telstar consoles were followed by the ColecoVision.

Technology
The original Coleco Telstar used a General Instrument AY-3-8500. This inexpensive chip contained the game logic and graphical output functions.

The Telstar Arcade uses a very different triangle cartridge based system with each cartridge containing a MOS MPS 7600 processor, as well as game ROM. This cartridge based approach is completely different from every other Coleco Telstar console, which were dedicated consoles. However the console still shared the Telstar brand.

External Resources

 * Old Computers Museum - Coleco Telstar page with history and specs.
 * Pong Story - Coleco Telstar page with history and photos.
 * Video Game Console Library - Coleco Telstar page with history, specs, and photos.


text:
History of video games/Platforms/Color TV-Game

Development
Nintendo licensed the Odyssey technology from Magnavox to produce the Color TV Game 6 and Color TV Game 15. Noted engineer Masayuki Uemura assisted in the development of Color TV-Game systems.

Launch
Released in 1977, the Color TV-Game line were the first consoles released by Nintendo, starting with the Color TV Game 6.

The Color TV Game 15 was released in 1978 at a cost of 15,000 yen.

The Color TV Game Racing 112 had the worst market performance of the Color-TV-Game series. The price of this system was cut multiple times.

Legacy
350,000 Color TV Game 6 consolers were sold, but were not profitable due to high production costs. The complete Color TV game series sold about three million consoles.

The Color TV-Game was succeeded by the cartridge based Nintendo Entertainment System and Famicom, which featured much improved capabilities over the Color TV Game line.

Technology
Models of the Color TV Game 6 used 6 C type batteries as a power source, with an optional power adapter being available for the CTG-6V model.

Often Japanese televisions of the 1970's were not capable of easily accepting an input from consumer hardware, so the Color TV-Game line was designed with this in mind.

Notable games
The Color TV-Game 6 and 15 both shared their primary Mitsubishi integrated circuit, with the Color TV-Game 15 exposing 9 more games then the Color TV-Game 6.

Origin of Nintendo
Nintendo was founded in Kyoto, Japan in 1889 to make Hanafuda cards, making it one of the oldest companies to have a major impact on the video game industry.

External References

 * Centre for Computing History - Color TV Game 6 page.
 * Centre for Computing History - Color TV Game 15 page
 * Before Mario - Color TV Game series page.
 * Gamester81 - Color TV Game history, model info, and trivia page.


text:
History of video games/Platforms/Game & Watch series

Development
Gunpei Yokoi came up with the idea for the Game & Watch while watching a businessman fiddle with a calculator while traveling on the Shinkansen (Bullet Train). A chance incident requiring Gunpei Yokoi to drive Nintendo president Hiroshi Yamauchi to a meeting allowed him to pitch the idea, with approval being suddenly granted after a week of consideration.

Sharp produced the electrical components used in the Game & Watch. Engineers were split between hardware and software roles for development of the Game & Watch units. Development pace for the Game & Watch series was frantic, and developers were usually focused on quickly developing new units. While at least some of the developers of the Game & Watch were not informed of hard sales numbers, they were pressed into the sales at busy times to sell their own console in stores, which helped them better understand what their customers wanted.

Legacy
The D-Pad pioneered on the Game & Watch units was reused in subsequent Nintendo consoles, such as the Famicom/Nintendo Entertainment System. The Game & Watch series sold 43.4 million units worldwide, with 30.53 million consoles sold outside of Japan, 12.87 million consoles sold inside Japan, and with 9 models of the console being attributable to selling over a million sales each.

The Game & Watch line would see several continuations into the 2020's, either as in game homages, special edition themed consoles, software complications or even hardware releases such as the Nintendo Mini Classics series, and the Game & Watch: Super Mario Bros. console.

Technology
Game & Watch consoles reused calculator chips, and simply used displays with graphics rather than numbers to achieve the desired effect.

The 4-bit Sharp SM5X series of microcontrollers served as the processor for Game & Watch units.

The clock functionality was implemented with the use of a crystal oscillator.

Due to their uncomplicated electronics and rugged design Game & Watch units tend to be reliable.


text:
User:LGreg/sandbox/approches to knowledge (LG seminar 2020/21)/Seminar 18/Evidence/Evidence in Economy

What is evidence-based marketing ?
Evidence can be defined as pieces of information or facts that can indicate if a belief or an argument is valid or true. The main ideas behind evidence-based marketing are to streamline the promotion process and improve return on investment. Because the world is evolving, marketing had to adapt to consumers' new needs and choices while maintaining the same progress rate with contemporary technology. Evidence-based marketing is a marketing technique grounded on facts; it combines sociological and psychological theory with data analysis and business strategy. It relies on trends, industry practice, statistics, and consumer interviews to expand businesses' marketing plans for businesses. This marketing type is set up on a scientific-based procedure from the brainstorming stage to the execution, to estimating the successful functioning outcome. It is needed to use business objectives designed, determined, and developed to precisely measure campaigns' triumph. Evidence-based marketing can be a useful strategy to keep your business modern and competitive. As a real-life example of evidence-based marketing we can cite Netflix that use Big data for targeted adverts. It's quite simple, to see how it works here. When you're thinking about how Netflix is making suggestions to you on which movie to watch next. They are using your previous data (which movie you watched, which movie you searched) to make relevant suggestions.

Limits about evidence-based marketing
Often, we present proofs and facts and look forward to a rational person to make an intelligent decision on what strategy to choose. But people can have such a strong personal belief in a particular topic that nothing can make them change their minds. Even with strong quantitative evidence like statistics or qualitative evidence like consumer reviews, trends, they will not change their minds.

It's also possible to see a limit of evidence-based marketing on the reliability of the data. The accuracy of the data collected is so crucial for the worth of any research findings project. Data standard may be jeopardized by biased testimony or unrepresentative samples. If the data aren't precise, the evidence loses meaning, leading to a less reliable result.

We can also think about a budget constraint; some firms may not have enough expertise to conduct extensive surveys and not have enough funds to organize them. In such case, they may rely on less perfect data but cheaper data.

The time constraint can also be one of the limits for evidence-based marketing. Firms usually have not much time to meet consumer's needs. Indeed, they need to make decisions as quickly as possible to keep or get a strong market position.


text:
Music Theory/Indian/Madhyama

Madhyama/Madhyam is the 4th svara from the 7 svaras of Hindustani music and Carnatic music. Madhyama is the long form of the syllable म. For simplicity in pronouncing while singing the syllable, Madhyama is pronounced as Ma (notation - M). It is also called as मध्यम.

More information and importance of Madhyama
The following is the information about Madhyama and its importance in Indian classical music:

'''षड् - 6, ज -जन्म. Therefore, it collectively means giving birth to the other 6 notes of the music.''' So the svara Ma is formed from Sadja. Consequently, the Ma after the Ga of 600 Hz (Taar Saptak) has a frequency of 640 Hz i.e. the double of the Lower octave Ma. For example if these are the 4 Shruti's of Ma then,
 * Madhyama is the fourth svara in an octave or Saptak.
 * Ma is the immediate next svara of Gāndhāra (Ga).
 * The svara of Madhyama is Tivra and Shuddha. In fact Madhyama is the only Tivra svara in the Saptak.
 * It is said that Sadja is the basic svara from which all the other 6 svaras are produced. When we break the word Sadja then we get, Shad And Ja. It means that Shad is 6 and ja is 'giving birth' in Marathi. So basically the translation is :
 * The frequency of Madhyama is 320 Hz. The frequencies of the 7 svaras are also given below: Sa 240 Hz, Re 270 Hz, Ga 300 Hz, Ma 320 Hz, Pa 360 Hz, Dha 400 Hz, and Ni 450 Hz, Sa 480 Hz (Taar Saptak) ........ (and so on).
 * There are 4 Shruti's of Madhyama. Previously the main Shruti not only for Ma but for all the other svaras was on the last Shruti but now it is considered to be on the 1st Shurti.

Previously this was the position of the main Shruti of Ma. ^              1   2  3  4              ^              But now this position has become the main Shruti of Ma.

Sa, Re, Ga, Ma, Pa, Dha, Ni - Shuddha Svaras Re, Ga, Dha, Ni - Komal Svaras Ma - Tivra Svaras
 * All the other svaras except Sadja(Sa) and Pancham (Pa) can be Komal or Tivra svaras but Sa and Pa are always Shuddha svaras. And hence svaras Sa and Pa are called Achal Svaras, since these svaras don't move from their original position. Svaras Ra, Ga, Ma, Dha, Ni are called Chal Svaras, since these svaras move from their original position.

Ma is a Shuddha Svara as well as a Tivra Svara. But Ma is the only Tivra Svara. This is denoted as म॓.

 * Ragas from Kalyan Thaat, Poorvi Thaat, Marwa Thaat, Todi Thaat have Tivra Madhyama, rest of the thaats have Shuddha Madhyama.
 * Ragas where Ma is the Vadi svara - Raga Kedar, etc. Ragas where Ma is the Samvadi svara - Raga Malkauns.
 * Hypothetically speaking, Ma is said to be the Mahipal - Lord Indra, Mahipal as in, the three main gods, Bhrama, Vishnu and Shiva were first created i.e. Sakar Bhrama (Sa) and then these three gods created Rishimuni i.e. Re and then Gandharvas were created for singing and then lord Indra or Raja Indra i.e. Mahipal was created. Ma is made the acronym of Mahipal for showing the importance of the syllable Ma.
 * Madhyama is said to be sourced from call of the heron.
 * Madhyama is associated with the planet Moon.
 * Madhyama is associated with White colour.

title: Music Theory/Indian/Madhyama


text:
English-Hanzi/You are more likely to develop high blood pressure if

You are more likely to develop high blood pressure if:

 * Overweight
 * Eat more salt but lack of fruits and vegetables
 * Lack of exercise
 * Drinking too much alcohol or coffee (or other caffeine-based beverages)
 * Smokes
 * Lack of sleep or restless sleep
 * Over 65 of age
 * Family with hypertension history
 * Have black African or African Caribbean descent
 * Living in poor areas

在下列情况下，您更有可能患上高血压：

 * 超重
 * 多吃盐，但缺乏水果和蔬菜
 * 缺乏运动
 * 喝太多的酒精或咖啡（或其他基于咖啡因的饮料）
 * 抽烟
 * 缺乏睡眠或不安定的睡眠
 * 65岁以上
 * 有高血压病史的家庭
 * 有非洲黑人或非洲加勒比人血统
 * 生活在贫困地区


text:
Talk:Diplomacy/Variants

> Yahoo Groups Shutting Down

Should the section about the Yahoo group be removed, given that it is being shut down in December 2020?

https://ph.help.yahoo.com/kb/SLN35505.html

title: Talk:Diplomacy/Variants


text:
User:HMaloigne/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge/2020-21/Seminar group 15/Evidence

Evidence in psychology: Cognitive Dissonance Theory
Different forms of evidence play a crucial role in the development of psychological theories, such as the theory of Cognitive Dissonance. The theory of cognitive dissonance describes a situation in which an individual's inconsistent (dissonant) thoughts lead to psychological discomfort, which is alleviated by a change in behaviour and avoidance of situations which confirm the inconsistencies.

The first evidence to suggest the construct of cognitive dissonance was a case study conducted by Leon Festinger in 1954, involving covert observation of a small UFO cult called The Seekers. The Seekers believed that a great catastrophe would cause the world to end on December 21, 1954, and a UFO would rescue the true believers. Covert observation involved the researchers becoming members of the cult, to gain insight into their social and psychological processes in a naturalistic environment. This research was qualitative, as it focused mainly on behavioural observations rather than objective numerical data. Their observations aimed to determine how invested each member was in the belief system of The Seekers. Many members of the group left their families, their jobs and gave away many of their prized possessions and life savings in anticipation of the UFOs arrival. When the UFO never arrived, the members who put more emotional and physical investment in their expectations claimed their devotion saved the Earth from mass destruction. Festinger proposed that the more committed members were, the less likely they were to accept errors in their initial ideas, instead attempting to change the story to align with their beliefs. From this study, Festinger developed his Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Festinger's research highlights the importance of the use of qualitative data when investigating social processes. The researchers were able to observe the social reality and feelings of many individuals in conjunction with their relationship with The Seekers, to gather a basic understanding of the social mechanisms involved in cognitive dissonance.

As qualitative observations are prone to observer biases, quantitative evidence can also be influential in the development of theories for more insight into causal relationships. In 1959, Aronson and Mills used a controlled experiment to investigate effort expenditure as a cause of cognitive dissonance. They found that participants who had to undergo an embarrassing experience during initiation into a group were more likely to rate its members and activities higher on a scale of enjoyment, indicating that effort is a cause of cognitive dissonance.

The Quantity Theory of Money
The issue of evidence is relevant in the discipline of economics, and in this case monetary economics. Despite the general consensus within the economic community to rely on assumptions in order to create models, evidence is a necessary tool to understanding the interactions of economic agents.

The quantity theory of money, also termed the Fisher equation, is used in order to explain the concept of price stability in the macroeconomy. The quantity theory of money is shown below with M representing the money supply, V representing the velocity of circulation, P representing the price level and the T representing the quantity of transactions.

MV = PT

The equation argues that the velocity of circulation remains stable. As a result of this, an increase in the money supply will either result in an increase in the price level or an increase in the quantity of output. The purpose is to understand the effect of an increase in the money supply thereby allowing economists to understand the root cause of inflation which is central in monetary policy.

This is an important piece of evidence in the discipline of economics as although it may be contested, it generally effectively conveys the effect of policies on the general economy but does not apply to all economies. Empirical evidence supported this equation as Fisher effectively linked mathematics and economics through economic analysis of the economy in order to establish this equation as there proved to be a correlation between monetary policy and inflation.

Additionally, evidence was found in the real world due to looking the effect of monetary policy on the economy. However, other forces affect the economy so unless assuming ceteris paribus, the Fisher equation cannot be applied to every situation as most economic models assume rationality when humans are inherently irrational. Additionally, the economy reacts unexpectedly on numerous occasions and it is therefore unrealistic to use assumptions in every scenario.

Evidence in Clinical Nutrition
Clinical nutrition is a discipline within the sciences that combines empirical evidence and clinical observation in order to evaluate how nutrients can be used to improve human health outcomes.

Epidemiology has been implemented in nutrition research which in turn has informed dietitians on how to make the best clinical decisions. Evidence in nutritional science can often be conflicting for example a network meta-analysis of many randomized clinical trials may show different results than a single randomized control and lead clinicians to make different conclusions.

The quality of evidence in clinical nutrition varies in terms of the type of study design that has been carried out, where meta-analysis and randomized control trials are the most valid and anecdotal reports are the least valid. Having said this, the validity of randomized control trials has been questioned by many academics in the nutritional field. For example, if a trial is designed to compare high and low intake of a specific nutrient, in a randomized control trial, it does not take into account other behaviors that may occur as a result of limiting the intake that would be seen in non-clinical settings.

Limits of Evidence
Evidence is usually insufficient in deciding what's best for patients as there are many other factors that must be considered for example the risks, the merits associated with non-nutrition related treatments as well as the patients' own desires must also be taken in account.

Clinicians often lack time in order to carry out the necessary research in order to decipher the evidence in support for various nutritional treatments, however in an increasingly digital world information is seemingly more accessible than ever.

Introduction
There are many forms of mental training and introspection which go by the name of meditation. Broadly speaking, meditation is a practice where an individual uses a technique- for example, insight (Vipassana), loving kindness (metta), focus on a particular object or mantra- to achieve a particular state, usually one of emotional calmness and mental clarity.

The goals of practicing meditation vary greatly, from achieving a state of Enlightenment (as laid out in Buddhist doctrine), to reducing stress and depression. As such, the study of the practice of meditation spans a wide range of disciplines, including neuroscience, psychology and philosophy.

For the purposes of this article, the focus is on Mindfulness meditation. Mindfulness is characterized by non-judgmental awareness of experience in the present moment, whether pleasant or unpleasant.

Psychology and Science
The adoption of Meditative practices from 'Meditative Disciplines' by "western" psychology, as the practice of mindfulness is done to progress the state of calm for an individual. This relies heavily on the person's subjectivity and perception of a successful meditation. Different disciplines have recorded the effects of mindfulness and documented their successes, but how is the measure and evidence of this subjectivity explored?

Walsh and Shapiro's 2006 Paper for the American Psychology Association, details the effects of meditation on different medical issues. They recount studies that have demonstrated a correlative affect between the use of meditation and the benefits of it for stress-related illnesses such as increased hypertension. All medical studies here use a quantitative analysis to objectify the subjective experience by using empirical outcomes - such as the progress of a medical illness, which can be mapped and identified.

Evidence in brain activity
In testing the evidence for Mindfulness meditation, fMRI scans are used to track the brain physiology and neural activity in the subject’s brain, either during the act of meditating, or before and after meditating.

Studies show that the patterns of brain activation in subjects who meditate are different from non-meditators.

Indeed, meditation is shown to improve cognitive function and even produce changes in gray matter density in the areas of the brain which are related to learning, memory, emotional regulation, and self awareness.

Evidence for biological impact
There are many claims for the value of practising Mindfulness meditation, in particular, for reducing stress, anxienty and depression. Mindfulness meditation has indeed been shown to modulate pain, mitigate anxiety and depression , as well as regulation inflammation, circadian rhythms and glucose metabolism.

Evidence in quality of life
Practitioners of Mindfulness meditation are not restricted by the goal of improving their physiology. Meditation is often associated with the esoteric aim of liberation from suffering through awareness of the true nature of consciousness. Due to the esoteric nature of this aim, it can be problematic to measure evidence through the scientific method. However, some studies do suggest that mindfulness meditation may lead to an increased sense of quality of life in practitioners.

Subjectivity
Similar to the psychological and medical sciences, the meditative disciplines (eg. Buddism, Taoism), use subjective evidence to understand the development of one's own personal meditative progression. The qualitative aspect of this discipline cannot allow any objective conclusions to be reached- meditation is based on subjective personal experiences, due to the end result of meditation being the absence of suffering, and the achievement of enlightenment. The Buddhist understanding of meditation, the use of mindfulness and the focus on the present, is most widely associated with the Buddha, Siddharta and his achievement of enlightenment through the practice of meditation, famously as he sat under a tree. The experience of this is deeply personal and one becomes a Buddha (the achievement of enlightenment) when they complete the teachings of the first Buddha, Siddharta.

Whilst both science and meditative disciplines use empirical evidence or observation to understand the progress made by meditation, the use of quantitative and qualitative evidence differs.

Evidence in water scarcity measurments
Experts struggle to define a meaningful indicator for water scarcity around the globe. Indeed, no metric able to take in account every inluencial variable has been found yet, which makes the numbers unrepresentative of reality. It is very difficult to find a holistic measure because, in addition to addressing the physical problem of measuring moving water in different states, such a metric would need to consider water scarcity's intimate relationship to hardly quantifying socio-economic concerns such as government policies and adaptive capacity of a society.

Physical issues
The WSI (Water Stress Index), developped in the 80s, is the first formal quantification of water scarcity It measures the need for freshwater in terms of the number of people who compete for one flow unit of water (106 m3 per year). To measure water, the WSI relies solely on the annual river discharge and thereby neglets soil moisture storage, ground water storage and weather varability. This has now proven to be insufficient data to assess a country's need for water: the water we find in the ground plays a huge role in agricultural water demand and affects the sectors to which river water is distributed (domestic, indusrial or agricultural). Moreover, water fluctuation depends on weather conditions that are not constant throughout and between years.

Social issues
The ability of a country to adapt to weather variability (floods, droughts) and use its resources efficiently depends on its infrastructures and government efficiency. A distinction should be made between physically and economically water scarce countries. Indeed, a lot of countries have enough physical resources but do not invest properly in infrastructure, which results in important losses and bad distribution. Thereby, the population of countries which have sufficient resources lack access to water, while others who are categorised as "water scarce" by the WSI have a comfortable access.

As well as social issues, academic issues surround the approaches to water scarcity and whether or not the measurements in place that determine 'water scarcity' demonstrate actual lack of available water, as opposed to having sufficient water resources but the lack of equitable distribution.

Evidence in Ayurveda
Ayurveda is an ancient Hindu medicinal system that dates back 5000 years ago. Ayurveda also refers to general philosophy of health, wellness and life hygiene. It combines physical, mental and spiritual health. Although Ayurveda is generally recognized by World Health Organization as an idea of health and therapy, it is still percieved by many as a pseudoscience, as it intertwines empirical phenomena with metaphysical concepts. Ayurvedic medicinal practices may include herbal medicine, massage and meditation.

Ayurveda and cancer
The nervous system (Vata or air), the venous system (Pitta or fire) and the arterial system (Kapha or water) are three basics of Ayurveda and very important for normal body function. In malignant tumors all three systems get out of control and lose mutual coordination that causes tissue damage, resulting critical condition. Hence, patients suffering from cancer often resort to Ayurvedic treatments, like aromatherapy or massage. They are reported to help support immune system and better the mental conditions of the patients. Moreover, the majority of herbal treatments used in Ayurveda (plants like Andrographis paniculata, Annona atemoya, Phyllanthus niruri and many others) have scientific evidence of anticancer properties - they influence different organ systems all together and nourish the body as a whole by supporting body's defense systems.

Ayurveda and dementia
Ayurvedic medicinal herbs modulate the neuro-endocrine-immune systems and are also rich sources of antioxidants and anti-inflammatory compounds. They are claimed to enhance memory and rejuvenate cognitive functions. Ayurvedic medications induce specific effects on brain functions, such as increase in blood flow and maintenance of memory.

As conventional synthetic drugs are often reported to cause undesireable side effects, herbal medicines, including the medicines and practises found in ayurveda, are becoming more popular as effective remedies for many brain disorders.