Dear Susie,
First, I should have commended you for your effort to uncover the facts
rather than develop a "theory" on your own.  Your info was well presented,
informative, lucid and I only added a word of caution for those who may have
misunderstood or read more into it than there was.  Sometimes I forget the
ambiguity of this format.  This is a complex issue.  Some people decry
"where's the research" perhaps not realizing the next fundamental question
of who would fund the research.  Unless the funding powers that be are
convinced of an imminent threat, political need, or corporate interests see
a profit, there will usually be no research, at least of grand and
convincing proportion.  This problem continually plagues holistic and other
generic research that fail to fit into any one of the above categories.
Because of this condition, I submit all sciences are "soft" sciences because
of these pervasive, non-scientific influences.  Additionally, in the absence
of supportive formal research, we are forced to use another reference, our
brain.  I cannot fathom the LD50 of Kaopectate, but if I drank an entire
bottle of the stuff, I am pretty sure I would not be a happy camper, though
I know of no formal research directly supporting that notion.  I am sure
your post was appreciated by all including myself.
 
best wishes,
alphachi
[Posted in FML issue 1880]