Ema
Senior Member
- Messages
- 4,729
- Location
- Midwest USA
I'm not sure why you think they are not doing this though in the same fashion as every other certified lab.I'm not asking for an unobtainable level of proof. I'm asking for evidence which could be easily achieved by tests which were of value. There may be periods of time where a really useful and important new technique has emerged, and has not yet had published research to show it's value... but this should not be decades! If the research being done shows that the techniques developed and used a decade ago do not hold up under blinded assessment, then that is reason to be sceptical of new techniques which are being sold by the same people as valuable, but again lack good supporting evidence.
There is difficulty with funding, but for labs like Igenex, profiting from the sales of their tests, providing evidence of their validity should be seen as a normal cost of doing business.
If NY state is satisfied with the reliability and credibility of the lab, and they have the most stringent requirements to be satisfied, I'm not sure why that is not taken into account at all.
All lab companies are for profit. Where is the clamoring for LabCorp to be funding and publishing double blinded trials on all of their testing? Their Elisa test has been shown to be no better than chance. So why aren't people calling it a waste of money?
Antidepressants have been shown to work no better than placebo in some studies yet they are still raking in billions of dollars for depression. But that isn't evidence based treatment any longer. So why not single those companies out for scorn and derision?
Examples like these are everywhere which is why insisting on evidence based medicine only makes no sense. Sometimes the evidence is wrong! Especially where huge amounts of money are in play. It's throwing the baby out with the bathwater.