ethical concerns was simply an example in a general case.
for instance, in a drug trial, you cannot pick subjects to treat on a random basis. in most medically-relevant situations, subjects must give consent and be informed of experimental procedures.
in the context of recaf, the constraint is not necessarily a problem of ethics.
the only practical way of running the study would be to retrieve samples from subjects that have agreed to participate and then subsequently analyze the data for sensitivity and specificity of the test. as far as i know, that is precisely what is being done.
what different protocol are you trying to suggest? i am curious to know what you think the "controls" are that need to be implemented.
i think you just have a basic, layman's view, somehow believing that a proper study must always be groundbreaking, perfectly controlled, and have plentiful subjects. unfortunately, science isn't always so easy. a study is simply any planned collection of data with appropriate statistical analysis. i don't see how you can possibly argue that biocurex isn't really conducting a study...explain to me how the data obtained here is non-scientific and unreliable. there is absolutely nothing wrong with the current study, and saying so just makes it clear that you lack any training or education in the sciences.
please don't be so stubborn and defensive. accept your mistake and do some learning. i know it's not really relevant, but i am a medical student with an undergrad degree in neuroscience and economics (dealt a ton with scientific studies and statistics, if i really need to demonstrate my credibility) and i find it laughable that you think something is wrong with the recaf study...
