Home
George Vithoulkas responses to the blogspot Quackometer (1.3.2010) PDF Print E-mail

I cannot believe that somebody with even the minimum of scientific education could mistake a simple 'initial' proposal for an experiment as a "complete protocol" for research and criticize it as such!!
If the sceptics would take up the challenge then we could devise a full protocol.
The process I was proposing is the one that we follow in order to "prove" a remedy. This is done usually with a few doses on healthy individuals.
Usually what happens is that in some individuals who happen to be more sensitive to the remedy, the characteristic symptoms of the remedy appear in the prover in a slight or more severe form and Alumina has as characteristic in its pathology a severe constipation.
My belief that the constipation would manifest (and you can be sure will be.... really experienced by some provers) was based on the fact of taking several doses (I suggested 60).
As a pilot study and as a matter of curiosity you may try this experiment yourself, if you dare.
Concerning the experiment you propose we tried it already with Randi and after five years of preparation and writing a 20 pages protocol and while everything was agreed in order to start the experiment in a Municipality hospital, Mr. Randi at the last moment demanded we start the process all over again!
Was this ethical? You can see the whole story in our website http://www.vithoulkas.com

George Vithoulkas

See the post of Blogspot Quackometer:

http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2010/02/george-vithoulkas-makes-a-fool-of-himself.html