The assumption basis of western medicine experimental model is wrong, that is, it is assumed that the experimental human samples are the same and the diseases are the same. So do the experiment with the same medicine. The fact is that people are different, and the same disease has different physical manifestations and conclusions in different people.

It is not difficult to see from this double-blind experiment that the total effective rate of serum biochemical improvement in the experimental group is 80.00%. 57.58% of the placebo group. In other words, taking a placebo actually has a curative effect of 57%. The inefficiency of the experimental group is also 20%. That is to say, 20 people in 100 are invalid. This contradicts the experimental hypothesis of western medicine. Why 100 patients with the same disease, 80 are effective and 20 are ineffective? And taking a placebo is also effective for 57 people? This is a typical mechanical thinking mode of western medicine. In fact, according to logic, it is not difficult to see that if the diseases are all the same, if it is assumed that people are all the same, there is not much influence, and they all use the same medicine, then the conclusion can only be unique. It's either valid or invalid. The experimental conclusion of western medicine is obviously not the case. It is not difficult to see that this experiment of western medicine is simply an absurd theory. We can only conclude that the double-blind experiment of 100 is ineffective for 20, and it is effective for those 80, 57 of which are also effective because of taking placebo. That means that 23 people take more placebos. The effective rate without taking medicine is nearly 60%, and 20% people get a little better after taking medicine. It doesn't work at all for 20% people. After the completion of this pharmacodynamic experiment, western medicine said that the conclusion was safe and effective. have

The incidence of adverse reactions in the experimental group and the placebo group were 1.72% and 0.90%, respectively, indicating that 100 users would have 1 00 adverse reactions. What patients know is only a safe and effective conclusion. He didn't know that he might be 1.

Such a small sample determines that the reliability of double-blind experiments in western medicine can be greatly questioned. Clinically, the patients encountered by doctors are also very different, often with multiple diseases, and in this respect, Western medicine simply can't find enough samples to prove its safety and effectiveness. The strict elimination of its experiments is impossible in practice.