I think we all have a few common goals here, and to argue over other things will get in the way, so I propose this:
Let us agree that if you will allow your mind to be changed on Alex products by the results of rigorous testing, then you are not closed-minded.
Whether you believe right now that alex's products work or not, this is enough agreement to go forward.
If you are closed-minded, you would believe what you believe, no matter the evidence.
Franco says that rings will show no effect on healthy young people, so we should restrict such testing to older or the elderly, or the sick.
I proposed before of giving rings to terminally ill patients and comparing survival rates after 1 year.
If all such patients are cured and living, would you accept this as proof that Alex's rings work?
Likewise, if any of them die, would you accept that they do not work?
I want to know what sort of experiment will be acceptable to open-minded people.
I think you need to do large scale double bind trials. Forget the claims Alex makes as he does not say the rings can necessarily cure the terminally ill. That would be almost setting up the test like you want a failure. And how the hell could we say if 'any' die it is proof against. What if 80 out of a 100 were cured? And that would constitute failure?
No, what is needed is a double bind trial (including gp and scf groups) over six months, a year, 2 years, 10 years, 20 years and 30 years. And at each of these junctures a full medical and scientific appraisal needs to be done. I'm talking blood tests, oxygen uptake, eeg scans, x-rays, hormonal levels, cysteine tests, organ function, symptoms of illness, tests for toxins and parasites in the body, and so on, the lot. Then we will know a lot more about what we are dealing with. And importantly the test needs to be as large scale and as demographically diverse as possible.
From these tests we would know in 6 months to a year if we are dealing with anything at all. Wouldn't you agree?
I am studying to be a doctor so maybe I will be able to organise and carry out these tests at some point. But you have to realise that I would have to pay for these tests myself and it could cost a fortune. The problems we face in medicine are such that the major tests are usually pharmaceutically funded for their own agendas. Few tests in medicine nowadays are published and recognised that have been done purely for science and the search for truth.
Dr. Phelps- 01-25-2008
And the testimonials go beyond what anyone could get from placebo. Franco turned from ugly into a good-looking man with a more symetrical and better proportioned face. If placebo can accomplish this then ATA is an atheist.
Franco went from ugly to a good looking man? Since when? And how do you know any of the other testimonials are true? We all saw that Alex didnt turn into a super model even though he claimed to make huge leaps in his appearance on many different occasions.
But I am also very unhappy with our doctor's education and approach. I can't stand the smug cynicism and that every truth must go through ridicule and then resistance before it is accepted. Why should the tryers and the geniuses have to go through such torture to do great things?
Why are you so bitter toward me? I havent been cruel to anyone here. Im just of the opinion that the rings dont do anything. Im open to some scientific proof though. Not someone showing a picture with different lighting and angles and claiming some small claimed change is proof that they are beautiful now.
I have nothing against alternative medicine. But it is just as full of scammers as allopathy is. Im not going to believe something just because someone said it. If his product GP is radically changing peoples bone structure why has no form of proof been offered. Alex claims it can do it overnight so it wouldnt be expensive at all to do a test. Dont you think word of mouth would spread fast about such an effect? Or do you think the people that have drastically changed appearance and the people they hang around would just be quiet about it? If it were true it would be in every magazine and every news show.
Knightwriter- 01-25-2008
Franco went from ugly to a good looking man? Since when? And how do you know any of the other testimonials are true? We all saw that Alex didnt turn into a super model even though he claimed to make huge leaps in his appearance on many different occasions.
He has, look at his pictures, it's obvious. No matter what the lighting or anything. The man looks like he's had plastic surgery. That is unless he had an awful allergy or took a beating at the time of the first picture. The proportions are all different.
How about we get Franco's friends on here to confirm it? Would that convince you that Franco's bone structure has changed?
Why are you so bitter toward me? I havent been cruel to anyone here. Im just of the opinion that the rings dont do anything. Im open to some scientific proof though. Not someone showing a picture with different lighting and angles and claiming some small claimed change is proof that they are beautiful now.
Because I think your attitude has been poor for a doctor, but perhaps I have made you out to be like the 999 out of 1000 doctors we have and you are actually not like that.
Have you not been cruel to Alex and his work?
I have nothing against alternative medicine. But it is just as full of scammers as allopathy is.
I agree, far worse in fact due to the lack of regulations and funding for studies. The science I believe is also often far too big picture and lacking in detail. I believe there are far less scam artists in orthodox medicine, but I believe the education is so doctored, if you'll excuse the pun, that the system is pretty fucked. As I've said before I think they can do this due to the education structure being to near completely into detail while ignoring the big picture. All deliberate from the lobbies and policy makers as far as I can see.
Im not going to believe something just because someone said it.
God yes, of course not. Alex's mega claims are so completely unsubstantiated and even if there is a lot of truth in what he says then there are surely many contingencies. His rings are no where near the be and end all in health.
As it stands I do think his work deserves some investigation though. I think there are seeds of possible worthy work. I am doing it on a personal level. How long did you wear the rings for Dr. Phelps?
If his product GP is radically changing peoples bone structure why has no form of proof been offered. Alex claims it can do it overnight so it wouldnt be expensive at all to do a test.
He thinks he has provided proof. I must say he looks better than he did, but for all I know he has been working out and eating better. My intuition is that he has done nothing different apart from his inventions though.
Dont you think word of mouth would spread fast about such an effect? Or do you think the people that have drastically changed appearance and the people they hang around would just be quiet about it? If it were true it would be in every magazine and every news show.
No, I don't to be honest. People don't believe things until there is mass acceptance. Most are herd thinkers. Do you not see how people everywhere are told what to think since young children by authorities and just continue like that until they are old? I mean most Americans voted Bush back in!
Do you really think the peasant mindset has gone?
You only have to look back over humanity to see how the masses behave and still do. They follow convention.
I don't think people have drastically changed appearance overnight. I think if it has happened it is not very noticable to people you see everyday, but very noticable to people you would only meet at christmas.
I did gp and scf for 2 months and I thought I looked only very slightly different, but people who had no idea about Alex Chui said that my face had changed. I never got this before from anyone in my 20's and during christmas I got it a lot. I'm 26 now.
kamebazooka- 01-26-2008
I think you need to do large scale double bind trials. Forget the claims Alex makes as he does not say the rings can necessarily cure the terminally ill. That would be almost setting up the test like you want a failure. And how the hell could we say if 'any' die it is proof against. What if 80 out of a 100 were cured? And that would constitute failure?
Is this true? I think I remember Alex saying they will cure any disease. Alex, please respond and confirm.
If 80 out of 100 are cured in alex group and only 5 out of 100 are cured in control, I would say alex wins. However if 60-80 are cured in both, I would say alex failed. However, i am not professional -- some trusted expert will need to define success and failure conditions.
However, if alex's claim the rings will work for everyone, he should be held up to 100/100.
No, what is needed is a double bind trial (including gp and scf groups) over six months, a year, 2 years, 10 years, 20 years and 30 years. And at each of these junctures a full medical and scientific appraisal needs to be done. I'm talking blood tests, oxygen uptake, eeg scans, x-rays, hormonal levels, cysteine tests, organ function, symptoms of illness, tests for toxins and parasites in the body, and so on, the lot. Then we will know a lot more about what we are dealing with. And importantly the test needs to be as large scale and as demographically diverse as possible.
From these tests we would know in 6 months to a year if we are dealing with anything at all. Wouldn't you agree?
Your test sounds great, and you're right this sounds expensive, but I believe alex should pay for it, as he has made enough money now from his products to do so.
However, dr phelps is right: there must be simpler, less expensive tests to tackle alex's big claims (bone shaping, etc...)
I don't believe alex can be convinced to pay for testing for lesser health benefits like in the experiment you describe, until the simpler tests are done first.
If big claims are shown to be true, alex will get so much new business, that he can be convinced to pay for more testing, which will earn him even more money.
If big claims are shown to be false, then alex will need to convince others that his rings still has smaller benefits.
for immortality, for a simple, inexpensive test, we need to find someone near death as a subject, so that there can be only a clear result: the person lives or the person dies. Otherwise, it will be endless arguments about whether the person looks cosmetically younger or older.
for bone shaping, take a person's face-bone measurements by a professional during the course of one week. (over longer time, the face may change simply due to growth or aging or nutrition). pictures may be arguable, but if you can trust someone who measures with instruments, that should be acceptable, right?
the idea is to find a simple, inexpensive test that alex can unambiguously pass or fail for his big claims. franco, you can then submit this test to CICAP for the $1 million prize. If alex sees you winning this prize, then of course he will want to pay for more extensive tests.
Knightwriter- 01-26-2008
I think you need to do large scale double bind trials. Forget the claims Alex makes as he does not say the rings can necessarily cure the terminally ill. That would be almost setting up the test like you want a failure. And how the hell could we say if 'any' die it is proof against. What if 80 out of a 100 were cured? And that would constitute failure?
Is this true? I think I remember Alex saying they will cure any disease. Alex, please respond and confirm.
If 80 out of 100 are cured in alex group and only 5 out of 100 are cured in control, I would say alex wins. However if 60-80 are cured in both, I would say alex failed. However, i am not professional -- some trusted expert will need to define success and failure conditions.
However, if alex's claim the rings will work for everyone, he should be held up to 100/100.
No, what is needed is a double bind trial (including gp and scf groups) over six months, a year, 2 years, 10 years, 20 years and 30 years. And at each of these junctures a full medical and scientific appraisal needs to be done. I'm talking blood tests, oxygen uptake, eeg scans, x-rays, hormonal levels, cysteine tests, organ function, symptoms of illness, tests for toxins and parasites in the body, and so on, the lot. Then we will know a lot more about what we are dealing with. And importantly the test needs to be as large scale and as demographically diverse as possible.
From these tests we would know in 6 months to a year if we are dealing with anything at all. Wouldn't you agree?
Your test sounds great, and you're right this sounds expensive, but I believe alex should pay for it, as he has made enough money now from his products to do so.
However, dr phelps is right: there must be simpler, less expensive tests to tackle alex's big claims (bone shaping, etc...)
I don't believe alex can be convinced to pay for testing for lesser health benefits like in the experiment you describe, until the simpler tests are done first.
If big claims are shown to be true, alex will get so much new business, that he can be convinced to pay for more testing, which will earn him even more money.
If big claims are shown to be false, then alex will need to convince others that his rings still has smaller benefits.
for immortality, for a simple, inexpensive test, we need to find someone near death as a subject, so that there can be only a clear result: the person lives or the person dies. Otherwise, it will be endless arguments about whether the person looks cosmetically younger or older.
for bone shaping, take a person's face-bone measurements by a professional during the course of one week. (over longer time, the face may change simply due to growth or aging or nutrition). pictures may be arguable, but if you can trust someone who measures with instruments, that should be acceptable, right?
the idea is to find a simple, inexpensive test that alex can unambiguously pass or fail for his big claims. franco, you can then submit this test to CICAP for the $1 million prize. If alex sees you winning this prize, then of course he will want to pay for more extensive tests.
We could conceivably test bone measurements and have the measurements analysed using plastic surgeon standards for symmetry and perfect ratio. That would be possible with low cost for GP.
And the problems you outlined are dealt with via a control and placebo group to contrast. A short and medium term are most certainly viable and both necessary.
kamebazooka- 01-29-2008
We could conceivably test bone measurements and have the measurements analysed using plastic surgeon standards for symmetry and perfect ratio. That would be possible with low cost for GP.
And the problems you outlined are dealt with via a control and placebo group to contrast. A short and medium term are most certainly viable and both necessary.
This sounds like a good plan. However I do not think alex would yet pay for such a test. Alex, please let us know if you change your mind!
I propose a short term procedure to pass stage 1 of the randi challenge.
Take GP/CF for 1 week and measure the bone-shaping results with calipers.
Of course this is not a proper scientific test, but if the results are consistently dramatic, it will be easier to proceed to more rigorous testing.
I heard the story of a scientist who believed that ulcers were caused by bacteria, and not stress as everyone else believed. Who would pay for a proper study, since everyone "knew" that ulcers were caused by stress? So this scientist himself DRANK a vial full of this bacteria, and then got ulcers. Of course this is not good methodology (and possibly dangerous!), but the result is dramatic enough, and repeatable enough so that people are willing to fund more rigorous tests. this scientist later got the nobel prize.
we need a similar kind of dramatic, repeatable procedure involving alex products. a later proper test will require larger samples, control groups, and longer timeframes, like knightwriter proposes.
