>- To me it's appalling, with all the anecdotal evidence, that this the effectiveness of the liver cleanse remains a mystery
You presented several good points.
First, you are among the many who have had noticible success and there are few who complain of not having success.
Understandably, it costs money to do even the simplest study and a good study can cost big bucks. Naturally, since most of the big bucks come from big pharma or from agencies and (so called) charities that support big pharma, it is unlikely that much if any funding would be allocated to a project that could knock the knees out from under big pharma.
Even if such studies were undertaken, a flawed negative study would be more than ten times as likely to be published in any journal than would the perfect successful study. Why? Big pharma funds almost all of the major journals. Even the ones that are not necessarily funded could end up being black-balled and derated by the industry. Not only that, but the researchers would basically face personal ridicule and attacks, possibly loosing their credentials, scientific standing, and funding. Look at what happened to Peter Duesberg when he suggested that HIV did not cause AIDS. See: HIV and AIDS