Try reading your own wiki articles before you post them. Just because some one described this situation doesn't AGAIN mean you get to declare the substance in question ineffective. You don't practice science you practice selective learning. My point has been left unchallenged. You proclaim it is not scientific to make assumptions, and by your own standards (which you dutifully ignore for the sake of ego) your conclusions HAVE NO SCIENTIFIC BASIS.
Are you just circling back on yourself? I'll say it again: I never claimed that colloidal silver was ineffective. I am claiming that no one should take colloidal silver to treat/prevent/diagnose an illness because there is no evidence showing it does.
Why anyone would use a product to treat/diagnose/prevent an illness, even though there is no rigorous evidence showing its effectiveness is beyond me.
"a null hypothesis is potentially rejected or disproved on the basis of data that is significantly under its assumption, but never accepted or proved. In the hypothesis testing approach of Jerzy Neyman and Egon Pearson, a null hypothesis is contrasted with an alternative hypothesis, and these are decided between on the basis of data, with certain error rates. These two approaches criticized each other, though today a hybrid approach is widely practiced and presented in textbooks."
and if you look one sentence after that...
This hybrid is in turn criticized as incorrect and incoherent – see statistical hypothesis testing.
top lel
As far as the claim of ad hominem, it is in fact not a personal attack. Clearly this is an observation of your behavior I am noting over a period of years DIRECTLY RELATED to your activities here. If you would like to see real ad hominem attacks I would be glad to go back in your post history to find some examples for you.
that is the very definition of an ad hominem. you're referencing my post history, which has nothing to do with my arguments presented in this thread. At best that's a red herring.
Since you decided to edit your post I will reply again.
"Why anyone would use a product to treat/diagnose/prevent an illness, even though there is no rigorous evidence showing its effectiveness is beyond me."
Have you ever considered that no one needs you to make these conclusions for them? Have you ever considered that perhaps you may not know as much as you think you do, and you may in fact be inhibiting people from seeking cheap, safe and effective medical treatment? Do you ever think to yourself "Hey I spend an inordinate amount of time posting in marketplace threads acting like bored a 2bit ineffectual mall security guard."?
A few reasons why people might turn to using colloidal silver, without RCTs completed to your personal satisfaction:
1. Allergies - A lot of people are allergic to many types of antibiotics and have a very limited selection of antibiotics.
2. Antibiotic resistant bacteria - These kind of super bugs are increasingly common, and often 2nd or 3rd line antibiotics are being used ineffectively. Colloidal silver operates on a different principal of action that is very difficult for bacteria to mutate a resistance to.
3. It is safe - Regardless of your personal standards millions of people use colloidal silver regularly. If you disagree please provide me a single case of injury caused by colloidal silver which was properly prepared and used in moderation. (tip: blueman doesn't count. He admitted to drinking
gallons a month in addition to using impure tap water and STERLING silver (includes toxic impurities like silver salts). Also this isn't an injury it is a cosmetic condition)
4. Viruses - Colloidal silver has been shown to be actively antiviral. There are a mere handful of antiviral drugs, and their efficacy and safety is questionable in many cases.
5. TONS of drugs that went thru endless RCTs were later shown to be unsafe, defective, or even lethal. How is that a pinnacle of scientific standards? The medical industry is increasingly showing itself to be more concerned with profits than healthcare and people are losing faith in this system and are forced to make these choices for themselves. Also I might add these RCT's that are used to approve drugs are funded by the company producing it. Conflict of interest much? Additionally who would fund the RCT for colloidal silver if it can't be owned under patent?
6. Not everyone can afford to spend hundreds of dollars to see a doctor so they can tell them what they already know every time they get a sore throat or a cold. Not everyone is insured. Not everyone can manage a day off of work or the STACK of costs associated with our medical system. The medical industry doesn't always have your best interests in mind, often all they have in mind is the bottom line.
7. Not everyone requires mommy and daddy to bureaucratically approve things that via ones own ability to learn and use critical thought can be discovered to be beneficial. Just because you haven't matured beyond the point that you require the state to make all of your choices for you does not mean the rest of us have to live under those same conditions. Humanity has made scientific discoveries before RCTs existed, and they will continue to do so with or without them. Additionally there are REAMS of studies on colloidal silver if you ever bother to read them. You attack these people because you yourself are not free, and real freedom threatens you because you are afraid of the responsibilities that come with it. Therefore you have to reassure your ego that your belief system is correct by going on the offensive on a subject which CLEARLY has no direct effect on you as some one who is not interested in purchasing this product.
That is just a handful of reasons why some one might use colloidal silver regardless of lack of industry backing. There are a lot more but I don't have the time.
As far as your "null hypothesis" argument, you know how science works right? There are many different schools of thoughts, methods, specialties, and processes which can some times disagree with one another in theory until conclusive empirical data is produced. This means opposing theories exist until one, all, or none of them are proved to be correct.
Also do you know the definition of hypothesis?
"hy·poth·e·sis (h-pth-ss)
n. pl. hy·poth·e·ses (-sz)
1. A tentative explanation for an observation, phenomenon, or scientific problem that can be tested by further investigation.
2. Something taken to be true for the purpose of argument or investigation;
an assumption.3. The antecedent of a conditional statement."
It is basically a fancy way of saying an ASSUMPTION "model". You can't just pick any theory out of a hat and conclude it is standard industry practice applicable whenever convenient for your argument. That is not how science works, you don't just get to pick apart a tiny unrelated facet and ignore the whole. Frankly I think you have a serious lack of a scientific education. Empirical processes is pretty much day 1 stuff.
Also it is not an ad hominem attack if it is a direct cause of your bias in presentation of your "points", it is in fact directly related to the discussion on a logical level, regardless of your personal sensitivity to it.
Why do I keep wasting my time with you? I am tired of watching willfully ignorant, obsessive, arrogant, pushy people overshadow beneficial discoveries with FUD for the sole reason that the government didn't give it a stamp. For you this has nothing to do with science or medicine and everything to do with your groveling statist ideals and fearfulness. Your statements not only clearly demonstrate your lack of understanding of your own words, but your obsessive fixation with bureaucratic approval.
Show Posts
each for live moruga or jalokias plus 
shipping for up to 3 plants, 
