 |
 |
Tebay, Wendy M wrote: > Critical thinking and examination of any new claim is a good idea, > but why is it we accept with comparative docility each announcement > of a new conventional treatment? We seem to accept their validity > and usefulness with hardly a murmur. Because a degree of critical examination and validity testing are allegedly already built into the processes used in the conventional development and testing of new medicines. Not always the case, however. Some conventional researchers have made bogus claims, falsified evidence, etc.. The later get exposed by their peers. Phil Tompkins Hoboken NJ age 60/dx 1990