2005 Chrubasik and Pittler 2005 Chrubasik, Pittler, and Roufogalis 2005 Grzanna, Lindmark, and Frondoza 2005 Thompson and Potter 2006 Eliopoulos 2007 Shukla and Singh 2007 White 2007 Ali et al. 2001 Bode and Dong 2004 Boone and Shields 2005 Borrelli et al. The medicinal, chemical, and pharmacological properties of ginger have been extensively reviewed ( Surh, Lee, and Lee 1998 Ernst and Pittler 2000 Afzal et al. Ginger has been used for thousands of years for the treatment of numerous ailments, such as colds, nausea, arthritis, migraines, and hypertension. Previous reviews ( Barrett, Kiefer, and Rabago 1999 Ness, Sherman, and Pan 1999 Talalay and Talalay 2001) have emphasized the importance of careful scientific research in establishing the safety and efficacy of potential therapeutic plant remedies and in defining the risks and benefits of herbal medicine. Although ginger is generally considered to be safe ( Kaul and Joshi 2001), the lack of a complete understanding of its mechanisms of action suggests caution in its therapeutic use ( Wilkinson 2000a). The oleoresin (i.e., oily resin) from the rhizomes (i.e., roots) of ginger contains many bioactive components, such as -gingerol (1-5-hydroxy-3-decanone Figure 7.1), which is the primary pungent ingredient that is believed to exert a variety of remarkable pharmacological and physiological activities. Ginger ( Zingiber officinale Roscoe, Zingiberaceae) is one of the most commonly consumed dietary condiments in the world ( Surh et al. Regrettably, a great deal of the information regarding the effectiveness and safety of these remedies has been garnered from anecdotal or historical accounts, and much of the information offered is generally misleading and might even be detrimental ( Ernst and Schmidt 2002).
For example, at least one recent survey revealed a significant problem with herb-chemotherapeutic drug interactions in cancer patients and, notably, at least half of the herbal remedies taken by these patients lacked research data documenting their potential interactions ( Engdal, Klepp, and Nilsen 2009). However, this might not be a safe or advisable practice. More and more older adults (i.e., baby boomers) are using complementary and alternative medicine dietary supplements and herbal remedies without advice from a physician on the assumption that these substances will have a beneficial effect ( Cohen, Ek, and Pan 2002). All in all a severely mies-judged film and the critics owe Malick a huge apology.The use of “natural” or alternative medicines has increased markedly over the last few years. The Farmer is Air - constantly tinkering with his weather vane, and his fields of wheat are often seen waving in the wind. Linda is Earth - In her narration she says that she is close to the "Oith". Abby is water - in the very first shot she is scavenging(?) by a stream and she is seen against the backdrop of the river. Bill is Fire - he is seen at first in front of the furnaces of a foundry where he works. Then Malick, in a moment of genius, allied the four main characters to the four elements Earth, Air, Fire & Water. Naturally she does not grasp most of the more adult moments between them and thus is herself removed from being fully involved in Bill and Abby's relationship and that is what has to come across. Hello! It is narrated by a 13 yr old and is essentially her view of the events that transpired. Critics complain that the characters are too remote - one feels removed from them and can't get involved.
It also conveys the slow pace of their lives. Too many actors rattle off their lines without letting their characters think of them. Malick used pause to convey that the characters think. They complain that the film is ponderously slow. However, Malick was hugely misunderstood by these dumb critics. The film was panned by the majority of the critics who could only find the cinematography worthy of praise.
Words of wonder level 19 movie#
I can understand why Malick didn't make another movie after he made Days of Heaven.
0 kommentar(er)
