Random Double-Blind Placebo Controlled Clinical Bunkum

Double Blind Placebo Controlled Clinical Trials

 

Hello fellow Age Reversal Enthusiasts!  Thank you for reading my blog!  I have returned from vacationing in South Carolina where I had a ton of fun, literally gained about ten pounds, read a considerable amount about various subjects pertaining to this endeavor, and spent a lot of time thinking about the optimal ways in which to move forward.  I am not concerned about the weight gain, as I am intentionally letting myself go prior to having my telomeres measured (the shorter the better).

The upcoming week is a big one.  I have an appointment to meet my Primary Care Physician to review my blood tests and to examine the MRI of my knee Tuesday evening.  I will post that data from my blood tests.  I continue to work out the details regarding what data points I will track, i.e. blood pressure, weight, BMI, body fat, calories burned, etc.  I will post a preliminary spreadsheet sometime this week. I also plan to order molds for custom orthotics in the coming days.

I received DNA Fit yesterday.  Today, I spit repeatedly into a clear, plastic cylinder until I reached the “fill line”.   I then screwed on a cap and put it in the box they sent.  It was a very simple process.  Though, much to my dismay, I learned it will be up to ten weeks before I get the results of my DNA sequencing.

The issue that keeps coming up the most, both in my own reading, as well as in conversations, is the subject of epidemiology.  Several fellow Age Reversal Enthusiasts have expressed a belief that for my endeavor to have any significance or validity, it must be completed under the guidance of a random double-blind placebo controlled clinical trial.  Initially, I agreed with them.  Thus, my typical response was, “Yea, I’d love to do that.  Yet, I lack the resources.  After I prove that one can dramatically reverse his or her age at the cellular level quickly, perhaps universities with extensive resources will run proper studies.”

I have since changed my mind.  My thoughts, readings, and discussions of the past week have forced me to reevaluate this subject.  I now conclude that “proper studies” are far less significant than most people believe them to be.   In fact, maybe random double-blind placebo controlled studies are impeding advances in medicine and knowledge and are simply antithetical to the scientific method and plain old common sense.  Maybe the so-called “gold standard” of research is making us dumber.

You may be wondering how I have come to this apparently shocking conclusion. The reasons are manifold.  First, there is something known as the curse of dimensionality.  It is a paradox which states that more factors decrease the predictive accuracy of statistics.  Essentially, having too many variables can make a study meaningless and/or easily manipulated.  The designer of a study can prove whatever he or she initially sets out to prove.

Secondly, the types of therapies that receive “gold standard” studies are almost universally therapies which are potentially incredibly profitable.  The main exception to that rule is when the “study” is really a misleading hit job. I encourage readers to always consider who paid for the given study?  Does whoever paid for the study control the study?  If so, do they have an agenda?  Biases?  We all know the headlines about vitamins not working.  “Vitamin C Useless in Combating Colds”    The story indicates:

“Taking vitamin C supplements to prevent a cold is a waste of time and money, say researchers. A review of 30 studies involving more than 11,000 people found that taking the tablets had no effect on the average person.”

What the article fails to mention is that the doses “studied” are a mere fraction of what any Orthomolecular Healthcare Practitioner would prescribe.  Of course it is ineffective!  I could similarly “prove” that exercise is a waste of time and money and has no measurable effect on the average person by studying people who exercise for 15 minutes, once a month.

Finally, we very truly do not need a random double-blind placebo controlled study to arrive at definitive knowledge.   If we did, then we could not be certain smoking cigarettes is addictive.  Or that it causes cancer.  Tobacco executives screamed, “There’s no proof!” through the 80s and a lot of people bought it, including many prominent politicians.  Guess what.  We still lack definitive “proof”.

I think it would be impossible to run a “proper study” of my endeavor because I am going to throw the kitchen sink at the problem of aging.  Any method that has been shown to lengthen telomeres/reverse aging for which I have both the time and money, I will try.  As such, we will not know what effect, if any, mega-dosing of vitamins has on my telomeres.  Or what effect the Wim Hoff Method (Innerfire) has on my telomeres.  Or, what effect High Intensity Interval Training has on my telomeres.  We will also not know if there are any synergistic effects of using multiple therapies simultaneously.  All we will be reasonably sure of is that everything I did collectively had an effect (or did not) on my telomeres.  We will know precisely what the effect was by taking before and after measurements of my telomeres.

In summation, a random double-blind placebo controlled study would probably prove nothing as it applies to my endeavor to lengthen my telomeres.  Different people have different biochemistry.  That’s why I have invested in and am excited to learn the results of my DNA sequencing.  What is good for me, may be the worst thing for someone else.  I am not interested in what works for the group.  I am interested in what will work FOR ME.  If you try to lengthen your telomeres, you must determine what will work for you, which will unquestionably not be exactly what works for me.

The bottom line is: I encourage you all to use the Scientific Method to conduct health and fitness experiments upon yourself.  Be curious.  Read. Think critically.  Question everything, especially the “experts”.

Thanks again for reading!  Until next time…

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *