So, do you attribute that to higher frequency of relevant medicinal use papers to some big disgust of big pharma, or a long awaited dearth of this info for some reason? Try to tease out what you are really trying to say.
So, do you attribute that to higher frequency of relevant medicinal use papers to some big disgust of big pharma, or a long awaited dearth of this info for some reason? Try to tease out what you are really trying to say.
Repeatedly the paper authors point to a loss of effectiveness in currently available pharmaceuticals, and the need to look at plants (where so many---perhaps all--pharma products began) for new drug possibilities.
So, do you attribute that to higher frequency of relevant medicinal use papers to some big disgust of big pharma, or a long awaited dearth of this info for some reason? Try to tease out what you are really trying to say.
Repeatedly the paper authors point to a loss of effectiveness in currently available pharmaceuticals, and the need to look at plants (where so many---perhaps all--pharma products began) for new drug possibilities.