Dear User, your account can be blocked if you continue to vandalize. Please stop vandalizing. Abhijeet Safai (talk) 10:25, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
- : I am trying to bring this decision to consensus so that it can be removed! But if you are using wrong ways to remove it, then I don't want to help you! I will not interfering now. You can do what you want to do with it. Have good luck. Thanks. Have a nice day.
- Dear Exoticvoid, thanks for the reply. I think that you have increased the lead section now, which is highlighting the safety issue! So you are actually doing harm to it! The proper way would be - to have description of this issue somewhere else and to have mention in ONE LINE only (as short as possible) in the lead section. My take on this point is - there is no doubt that this concern is important, but no need to mention it in the lead section. There are flaws everywhere in science and one should not be afraid to confront them. All the laws made by Mendel in genetics are modified, many equations by Newton are modified and so on..... but that does not reduce the importance of Gregor Mendel as father of genetics! Likewise safety concerns does not reduce the importance of Ayurved or defame it! It should be there but it should be said at proper place. That's what I feel. Your recent edits will not be reverted by me but they are likely to be reverted as they are without consensus, I feel. The proper way is - discuss on talk page first and then make changes. I would like to extend my full support to you once you have discussed it properly at proper place. Thanks. --Abhijeet Safai (talk) 12:35, 16 July 2012 (UTC)