Talk:Non-contact thermography

Necessary disambiguation or generalization
From etymological point of view — stricto el lato sensu — it seems to me there is no consistent basis regarding thermology (simply and no more...) to be or refer to only medical science.

Conversely, medical science, as newer branch on human journey scope when compared with physical science, may not comprise thermology, generally and uniquely as yours. This is a bad or nonsense comprehension!

For the desired and correct purpose, it will be better to say "Thermology" when referring to physical (generalist sense), and "Medical thermology" (one of so many specific senses) if referring to "the application of thermal concepts, ideas or technologies on medical issues".

Ex positis meritum citatum, I am proposing this page for disambiguation. [Beremiz Jan 2007]

Just because some quacks are using does not mean it is bullshit
It's such as sad day when writers like (JzG) will not let the truth be told....We are dealing with peoples lives. This article is far from being balanced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Magenta1984 (talk • contribs) 19:19, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

It is a fairly important tool where mammography is not an option (<35y, nursing). Just one of a few tools that help in a situation where it is very hard to make decisions. Richiez (talk) 00:53, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Correct. That is why I wanted the content ion a single place where the valid uses can be seen, and the obviously invalid compared. Popele are using the valid uses as a trojan horse to assert the invalid, y'see. Guy (Help!) 23:13, 9 January 2013 (UTC)