Jo:

>The hands-on approach hits me in the gut. Scientific
>citations are no authorities of truth.

I agree that scientists make mistakes and that science has found only a
part of the truth, but my opinion is:

One can't have it both ways. Some people seem to dislike scientific
authorities, and yet are ready to put forward scientific arguments
which support their claims. But be aware that, it you reject science,
then the following (non exhaustive) list of terms is strictly forbidden:
   Protein, mineral, vitamin, adaptation (in the Darwinian sense),
molecule (especially Maillard's ;-)), germ (and especially the
"beneficial germ theory"), enzyme, *Brix*.

So, while evidently all remarks based on experience "in the field" are
extremely appreciated, it seems no less obvious to me that any scientific
claim should be in principle proven, or at minimum, objections based on
science should be accepted.

JL