***How Accurate Is Scientific Testing?

What is meant by "peer reviewed"? What is so-called blind and double blind testing and how accurate is it? Why do "scientists" refuse to even look at anecdotal evidence?

Peer Reviewed: What this means is that persons just like the person who wrote the report thought it was accurate. Doesn't this mean that those peers are just as "educationally handicapped" as the person who wrote the report. Or, is it merely a friend who thinks like you? There have been at least 4 "peer reviewed" articles in various medical journals proving that vitamin C is not useful against cold and flu viral infections. All of them are false, yet believed by many, particularly the persons aimed at (Medical Doctors).

From the books and studies that Medical Doctors have received in Med School, they believe that 75 mg of vitamin C is a "good" Required Daily Allowance (RDA). This is the best example I know of, for "educationally handicapped" as a label for MD's.

Of all the animals, we primates lost one enzyme some 65 million years ago. That particular enzyme was crucial as it is needed to transform blood sugar (glucose) into ascorbic acid (vitamin C). Virtually all other animals actually manufacture vitamin C as needed. It just so happens we do have a good reliable "tested" RDA for a 150 pound primate - an ape whose need for vitamin is the same as ours. WOW! That figure is 4000 mg. And that is just an average. If that ape gets sick, it may be10 times that figure

Here's another fact. Virus and bacteria multiply in the blood by binary - that is, they double about every 20 minutes. That means that in 200 minutes, the amount of virus cells can go from 1 to over 1000, and in another 200 minutes to a million. Yes, billion and then trillion are next.

The "phony" Vitamin C reports were either only 1000mg (1 gram) or less. That's per hour. By the time that symptoms are bad enough for notice by the person, they are in the billions. This means that 1000 mg simply cannot kill off even half of the virus cells.

For arguments sake, let's say that this amount does kill of half of the invading cells. In 20 minutes, you're back to the original levels, and in 40 minutes, it's twice the original, and by the time the hour has passed, you're up to double the original, and another 1 gram won't kill more than a quarter. Binary is very fast multiplication.

I am totally against vaccines of any kind. Do you know what I do that stops a cold or virus immediately? I take 4 grams of vitamin C every 15 minutes. By the half hour or so, all symptoms are gone, and I often have to go no further, but I then take one every 15 minutes to just "mop up" any hidden survivors. Much cheaper and much less problem than any drugs.

All those "peer reviewed" studies were false because of the lack of "correct" knowledge not taught in medical schools. Any MD"s who learn such do so on their own, and it takes exceptional persons to do that.

Blind and Double Blind testing: This the "common" test where there is an actual drug, and a "placebo" (sort of sugar pill harmless and ineffective - supposedly). The placebo is the "control", and the drug is tested for how effective it is as opposed to the "nothing" pill.

In 1948, I met Joseph Banks Rhine at Duke, had dinner with he and his wife and spent the night in his spare bedroom. (For those who don't know about Joe, he invented the term Extra Sensory Perception. In 1932, his book "The Mind of Man" created a furor. Psychologists called him a quack whose mathematics were wrong. Mathematical PhD's claimed they didn't believe him either, but his math was perfect. Joe actually started his testing of ESP to debunk it, and wound up proving that it did exist and wasmuch more valid that thought.

Joe and I had corresponded,as I had done a lot of research over a year or more using his 'Rhine Cards"). All my testing of various subjects had proven to me that hypnosis could increase ESP ability. Joe's testing in his lab showed exactly the opposite. We argued (not fought) until 2 in the AM, but couldn't find any way that either of us was either wrong or right.

Years later in writing my doctoral thesis, I decided to write it on hypnosis, and in the course of my reading, I found several different tests where one hypnotist got one answer and another got a different answer. That is Professor A did test A, and got result A. Professor B did test A but got result B. This led me to the answer.

Look at 2 very well proven postulates in hypnosis and ESP.

1. A hypnotized person has an almost "insane" desire to please the hypnotist.

2. ESP does exist, and the unconscious mind knows much more than we do.

Now, if those two postulates are true and well proven, as they both are albeit in differing sciences. Here are a few conclusions that can be seen.

1. At least some of the tested in blind and double blind know unconsciously what the experimenter wants to prove, (and also which pill they got) and they will strive to give him/her that result. I wanted to prove that ESP was improved in some by hypnosis, yet Joe wanted to prove the opposite. We both got what we wanted. (I was very sorry that he had died before I figured that out as he would have been as delighted with it as I was.)

2. Now let's look at the opposite. Suppose that many of the persons involved for some reason don't like the experimenter. Now, that gets wrong results.

I do not believe that there is any such thing as "blind" or even "multiple blind". Joe proved most of that years ago. Too bad his research has been largely forgotten.

Anecdotal Evidence: This is anything that is not "proven" by the above "scientific" research. In other words, just because there are a hundred similar stories of how a certain "thing" cured someone of something, that's not proven evidence.

I have to agree that one or even 2 cases aren't proof, but when the numbers reach over 100, or even 10, that's evidence that should not be ignored. I work within the limits of the unconscious mind, and there are many things that cannot be measured and researched in that area. That does not mean that they are false.

My Neuroliminal Training has definitely solved at least 4 known allergies that were impacting my life. (The FDA forbids me to say the "cure" word - how's that for nonsense? I have hundreds of anecdotes for the same allergy experiences from many people. How can you test scientifically the unconscious mind? No two are the same in the first place. I found out that with Joe and I and our tests that proved conclusively that we were both right, and both wrong at the same time.

Of course, I haven't even touched on the MD 'whores" that when paid by Big Pharma falsify tests.

Do I trust any medical or drug testing at this time? Very little - now you know my reasons.