Hi Lars,
 I explained in my post above:
"I question "sharing the scientific understanding of nature's path", because basically, every nature science shares it's understanding, but this is not describing what we do (and we don't teach nature science). Besides that, "nature's path" implies to me living and dying, eating and being eaten. Although this may belong to our understanding as well, it is not what META-Health is about to me. " So I find it does not clear enough define META-Health, or could even be misleading the thoughts of the reader..

Equally, I'd like you to take the other shared viewpoints into account, or to share why you don't see my argument there as relevant. Thanks!