Talk:Tummo

Why was the 'scientific discussion' section removed?
The reason given was that it's "woo", except that none of it is. The section, besides being absolutely relevant to the topic, cites sources nobody so far has complained about. So is there now a problem with the sources? If so, what? Because removing a whole chunk of the article and then citing "woo" as the reason is hardly something I can have good faith in. déhanchements (talk) 06:26, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Any sources here would need to be WP:MEDRS. Alexbrn (talk) 06:47, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

What does this page have to do with medicine? Are https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3612090/ and https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0058244 not reliable sources? déhanchements (talk) 19:32, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Descriptions of biophysical phenomena are WP:Biomedical information, which is why you are producing medical journals. Any such source must be WP:MEDRS. Alexbrn (talk) 20:00, 20 November 2019 (UTC)


 * Wouldn't https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2002/04/meditation-dramatically-changes-body-temperatures/, which was in the section, be a secondary source by the definition laid out in WP:MEDRS? déhanchements (talk) 02:46, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
 * No. We need something like a review article or statement from a major medical body. Alexbrn (talk) 03:22, 21 November 2019 (UTC)