User:Zaidsmith

Hello there.

I have some expertise in two general areas: biomedical science and esoteric religion, especially western Sufism.

On the biomedical side, I've a BA in psychology, an MS in psychobiology, a PhD in neuroscience, and postdoctoral work in cell biology and Drosophila genetics. I've worked for about a decade in the area of medical technology assessment in the US, and at present I am employed in the pharmaceutical (ophthalmics) industry.

On the religious side, I've studied (as in practiced) Buddhism (Vajrayana) and that variety of Sufism that was brought to the West by Inayat Khan, for about 30 years. (Odd how time both adds up and rolls away.)

On request (however unlikely), I can fill in more details (such as references, publications, etc.) about the above.

Naturally, I can only contribute from the realm of what I know. And, I agree that in the Wikipedia, what is said should be documented. Nonetheless, from where I sit there is an interesting dilemma, which is that some things that are known are known only by a few, and not documented publicly. For example, there are research findings from drug company studies that are not published, and yet that guide important events such as drug approvals for marketing. How to convey this knowledge? In the realm of esoteric religion, the basis of knowledge is direct experience, which is very often not written down in any publicly-available form. Moreover, what is said publicly is sometimes quite misinformed. What to do? Here, the rules of the game are clear, and in some areas (more the religion side than the drug side) we simply have to be resigned to the fact that Wikipedia will likely forever be wrong about things.

That said, within the confines of the rules, I'll try to help things along a bit.