Am I right in reading that the subjects of this study were simply "asked" as to what pathogens they had????
And that this guy who conducted the study also never did any testing because he "did not have the credentials" to do so?
So the guy did Chi Square testing with a p value less than .01 and says that this machine clearly works but never did any testing of actually presence of pathogens?
This is not valid and seems similar to psychotrophic drug testing techniques.
Also, you say that you have had no complaints to the FDA about your product but also that you are not affiliated. Of course they would have no record of complaint. I could call the FDA and tell them that my blowdryer is on the fritz but I am doubtful that they would "record" it. I don't get that.
Also , there is a claim on the site that says that no one has been able to refute these claims. Well, how or why would one refute claims that have not even been properly established?
Also there is no information about the subjects in the sample....what else are they being treated for? What other meds do they take? Etc etc....Without taking all this and much more into account, how can you properly identify all dependent and independent variables? And, most importantly, how can one determine accurate causation?
You don't need the FDA to perform an accurate statistical study and you don't need an MD to order tests either. Any college student with a sophomore level statistics textbook and a nurse practitioner would suffice. And stool and blood tests can even be done right there in the lab can they not?
I fail to see how you can say that killing some microbes in a jar in vitro applies directly to killing microbes in vivo (much less helminths). I mean anyone can get a STERIpen to do the same in a glass of water. But does this mean that if we put that same pen in a a bodily orifice it will kill all that is pathogenic in our bodies?
If you think so, then I will certainly give it a go.