Double Blind Randomized Trials?
This scam: to force expensive randomized trials on everything is designed to filter out the cost effective competition.
To me most studies are frequently misleading, especially the newer ones, most are funded by vested interests and real researchers are those who have to fight the system and are usually lost in the scuffle. See:
http://politicsinhealing.com/
The true measure of efficacy is generally not randomized, double blinded, controlled clinical trials which may be useful but are extremely limited due to all manner of agendas and design complexities. In some cases, they are impossible to do, say for such things a DMSO, Chemo, majority of surgeries, etc. These cannot be double binded as one can smell DMSO, see the effects of Chemo and surgeries etc.If 100 people do something which makes them feel better and/or get cured than that's all that matters. An honest statistical outcome is where the rubber meets the road. Of course this is hardly ever considered. In our system, where one shoe fits all, everyone is allowed to dispense treatments as long as we do not address the underlying causes. Many researchers are now even blatantly saying that they are in the business of managing illness. What better way to create a perpetual money making machine? And in many cases this includes the alternative medicine gang too.
Most of what I read, does not consider individual biochemical differences, oh yes some give lip service to it, but fall far short in dealing with it. As an example, I followed a protocol for Beta Sitosteral without any discernible effect on my nocturnal visits to the bathroom. It was only after I spend some time determining my metabolic type and food sensitivities that I achieved some measure of success this has opened up my eyes and I am eagerly learning more about this area. My researches have forced me to conclude that nutrition is the key and generally not some magic supplement. Regarding Beta Glucan (touted for its studies etc.) I know of a number of people who are taking it but are unsure of its benefits. So why are we not getting any positive anecdotal data?
In my view, before anyone jumps into a regimen they should at least figure out their metabolic type or constitution as the 5000+ year old Ayurvedic medicine did long before all the current bull studies became such a self severing standard in the west. Some good books to read are:
http://www.metabolictyping.com/index2.html
Ayurveda: Science of Self-Healing by Vasant D. Lad
Just to cite an example of work that is totally against mainstream thinking but, in my opinion, has considerable value for the right metabolic types is the following diet:
"The main principle of this dietary model is a marked increase in the consumption of fat, and the reduction in the consumption carbohydrate, as the energy source for the body."
Now most will be rolling their eyes etc. and jumping to the conclusion - oh anther Atkins diatribe and they will be wrong again. The differences are discussed on the above site. Unlike Atkins, this diet shuns supplements and high proteins and uses saturated fats in their correct context. This is based on ratios found in nature and has cured many incurable diseases as per two clinics in Poland. Of course this mountain of antidotal evidence will never do, as working with underlying disease causes are counter to medicine and the supplement businesses....
While I am not a fan of the Atkins diet primarily because of high protein (much of it processed) and all the supplements he pushes - I am compelled by the number of people using it successfully to achieve their goals. You can't have the #1 health book on the market for all these years, in spite of all the high powered propaganda to the contrary, if the program doesn't work.Yet again, here is something all the studies in the world won't change. The outcome is there in spades already.
http://www.mercola.com/2002/aug/24/atkins.htm
Chris Gupta
posted by Chris Gupta on Monday September 8 2003
updated on Saturday September 24 2005URL of this article:
http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/chris/2003/09/08/double_blind_randomized_trials.htm
Related ArticlesDrinking Water Fluoridation is Genotoxic & Teratogenic
This paper by Prof. Joe Cummins is a very important 5 minute delegation made to London Ontario Canada "Civic Works Committee" public participation meeting on January 25, 2012 on fluoride*. While a bit technical it is short and easy to grasp. A must read as it goes to the heart of the matter regarding the well established toxicity of fluoride which is well in all scientific circles even before water... [read more]
February 06, 2012 - Chris GuptaDemocracy At Work? - PPM On Fluoride
Here is a commentary on the recent (Jan, 25th, 2011) Public Participation Meeting (PPM) on Fluoride in the City of London, Ontario. The meeting started with a strong pro fluoride stance form the City engineer. His lack of knowledge on chemistry of the toxic wastes used to fluoridate water could embarrass even a high school student never mind his own profession. He blatantly violated his "duty to public welfare" as... [read more]
January 29, 2012 - Chris Gupta"Evidence Be Damned...Patient Outcome Is Irrelevant" - From Helke
Further to The Future of Complementary/Integrative Medicine & Patient Choice, here is an important must read and act note from Helke Ferrie, a superb Medical Science Writer and Publisher. Now that the true colours of the well known shortcomings of allopathic medicine are being discovered en mass, the screws are being tightened by the pharmaceutical masters on their medical puppets. It seems that they are prepared to stop at nothing.... [read more]
September 16, 2011 - Chris Gupta
