The problem with Evidence

Let's define some terms in the hopes of helping everyone come to a more complete understanding.

When people ask for "evidence," I am assuming that they are referring to statistics done in the context of some type of clinical trial where a group of people with similar symptoms are divided up into two difference groups. One is treated with the protocol that is the subject of the trial and others are given a placebo. Over a certain period of time each group is tested and test results along with personal assessments of symptom improvement are aggregated into results. These results are published in a scientific journal and this publication is often referred to by people as evidence.

Now this is a very expensive process, so in a profit-driven society, do you think anyone starts this process to test a protocol from which no product can be patented and sold for profit?

Also you have to examine the intention of the entities who sponsor this type of "evidence gathering." Mostly this type of "evidence gathering" is sponsored by biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies. These companies exist to create profit for their owners / shareholders.

Is it more profitable to share a protocol that is a combination of making the best food choices, along with supplementation using commonly available substances like Epsom Salt, and Pickling Lime and results in sustainably high levels of health?

or

Is it more profitable to develop products that yield temporary symptom relief over a long period of time making someone dependent on a patented chemical to provide temporary relief to their pain and suffering while not really provided long-term improvement in health levels?

Does it make sense that until we make the decision to restructure our world to provide the greatest benefit to all rather than the greatest profit to a few, that the type of evidence that you seek will not be readily available?

Does it make sense that given that this type of evidence is specifically gathered to gain FDA approval as quickly as possible for a product whose main purpose is temporary symptom relief, that this evidence may be a less than reliable foundation upon which to build one's truth about human health? Do you desire temporary symptom relief or sustainable high levels of health?

Since 1993, the Jimmy V foundation has raised over $80 million dollars to fund cancer research. That's just one foundation. We've collectively funneled so much money supposedly for finding cures to disease yet there has been no "evidence" published of any cures discovered.

Could this be because that the people who we choose to give this money to are not looking for cures but rather products? If we judge their efforts based on the amount of cures, we'd give them the grade of "F". But when judged on the amount of products they've produced, they get an "A+".

Given that this is the reality of how our society gathers evidence perhaps we might rely more heavily on the experience of others who are looking for the same things that we are looking for. Maybe if we are willing to take action based on the experience of others who are seeking the same things we are seeking, we may develop our own experience from which we can build a knowledge base that would benefit ourselves and others as well.