naturalsociety.com é seguro?

While I must admit I have not thoroughly read through much of the site's content and am by no means an expert it shows a lot of red flags. The website does not openly disclose who it is run by and has not been fact-checked by a third party. when you do look into much of the information they present as fact you will find that very little of it has little to no base in actual science. this is very dangerous in this field as It could prevent people from seeking substantial medical aid because they believe in some un-proven remedy from this site. I have nothing against natural medicine as long as it is based on fact which this site does not seem to be.

This is a very good site for natural healing remedies that work. It is a shame that WOT allows it to be bombarded with negative ratings from those who obviously are trolls for the pharmaceutical industry. WOT has allowed this to happen to many other websites, some that don't allow additional comments or ratings due to the sites being bombarded with negative comments. These websites are from people that are trying to help people with the ingredients that GOD gave us, as opposed to the chemicals and poisons that are harming and killing so many, yet making the pharaceutical industry very very rich......

it is strange that WOT associates alternative medicine with controversial; many WOT ratings are unreliable particularly in regards to alternative medicine; it is possible that many negative votes are from people who have no deep understanding of the issues, but there is evidence that paid trolls are also active on rating sites like WOT

My wife became upset after learning that Monsanto was Genetically modifying Marijuana. I had never heard of such a thing. So I googled and found this site. With great claims of Monsanto looking to control the new legal market with GMO pot, but absolutely no evidence. I followed the one link in which this claim supposedly came from. It said NOTHING of the sort. While I believe that there should be discourse on alternate medicines and methodologies, just pulling sensationalist crap out of the butt helps no one. VERY POOR journalistic standards.

I read several articles looking specifically for unsupported scientific claims but found none. The critism of the verasity of the content on this site appears to be unsupported. Well, I would rather have WOT error on the cautious side, but sometimes I wonder if our big industries are now paying people to be critical of sites that attempt to expose serious malfeasance of our bigest corporations, especially including big AG. What say you WOT corporate, have you been paid to denigrate this site, or any other for that matter?

This site makes many claims for which it suplies insufficient evidence. The idea that something that is natural is automaticaly better than an equivelent arteficial thing has been thoroughly debunked, and it's high time everyone realized that. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Their extraordinary claims do not even have mediocre evidnce.

Once again the criminal Big Pharma and the totally corrupt AMA have set their Internet shills on a alternative medicine site. What are these organizations afraid of? Being found out for being the frauds and heartlessly greedy muppets that they truely are? I'd reckon that's it. This site is safe, with zero malware dangers, and also safe in that it gives people a CHOICE from the phony treatments and the so-called doctors who sold their souls for money and who profit over ruined lives and corpses.

I have zero problem with this site. If it doesn't relate the mainstream guidelines, it doesn't mean it is bad. Plus, can we really consider every review of alternate sites authentical? Of course the "opposition" will go against it and they have the ressources to do it.

Dangerous pseudo-science site that pushes quack "cures" for cancer, dangerous detoxes, useless or dangerous supplements, and every other kind of woo. It's also virulently anti-vaccination, peddling all the usual lies and propaganda of the anti-vax crazies. AVOID!

Simply amazing how WOT works. Just because a site reflects a different opinion than the way mainstream society thinks, they get poor ratings. I will readily admit that I have not researched every article that this site has published, but I have researched quite a number of their articles and I think the WOT rating on this site is way out of line. Because they offer alternatives to questionable practices, they have "ethical issues"? Is it considered to be "hateful or questionable content" if it is not sugar coated? I find it rather interesting how the comment statistics show a HUGE difference in this sites ratings as well. WOT has more ethical issues and spews more hateful or questionable content than the majority or the sites having a poor WOT rating. Maybe they should have purchased a WOT Trust Tool.