Benjamin Ozgood Peirce- Harvard professor who solved the grey areas
in early Calculus. He published his theorums and explanations and his book is still used today as more variations of Calculus are added to it. He resolved the missing links and completed the very foundation of this purely mathematical science. He was a co-founder of Calculus.
"No one can change math, argue against math, nor re-invent math."
ABOUT THE "PEIRCE POSTULATE"
By Bret Lowell Peirce
We all can acknowledge that math is the basic order of the universe. Math implies through probability, math describes through results, math rules out, math proves. Math is the law that provides order to chaos and connects matter with energy. Mathematical structure and theory are used in chemistry, psychology, engineering, electronics, astronomy, biology, medicine, geometry, athletics, and physics.
Math is alway objective, never lies, and doesn't change ever.
The Pierce Postulate indentified and validates a very specific disease scenario using probability to demonstrate effectiveness of treatments.
WHAT ARE THE ODDS THAT DIFFERENT, "UNPROVEN" SUBSTANCES AGAINST A DISEASE CAN ALL END UP HAVING THE SAME EXACT ACTIVE INGREDIENT, (BY ACCIDENT)
WHAT IS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF DISCOVERING AN IDENTICAL "ACTIVE," ELEMENT IN ALL OF THE POPULAR ALTERNATIVE TREATMENTS USED FOR CANCER.
LOOK!!!
PROOVING effectiveness of treatments is just a basic probability question.
WHY?
-
THERE IS NO WAY EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEIR TREATMENTS FEATURE A HIGH AMOUNT OF THE SAME ACTIVE INGREDIENT BY MERE COINCIDENT OR ACCIDENT.
-
THERE IS NOW AMPLE RESEARCH TO SUPPORT THE PROBABILITY!
*What would you think/... How would you feel about these ten different men? * Now what would you think?* Would you think that, at the very least, somebody should tell these people about the common ingredient they all are promoting, (not selling?) STOP!!! What the heck just happened? Many, many of you went from sheer and total skepticism to curious, interested! You changed your position! You did it in a matter of seconds! You did so without a doctor's opinion or A.M.A. endorsement! What just happened? How did a common ingredient become so relevant? ACCORDING TO THE POSTULATE, THE NEW FDA STANDARDS IN DETERMINING THE VALIDITY OF CLAIMS FOR TREATMENT EFFICACY SHOULD BE AS FOLLOWS.
How does a common ingredient in vastly
different therapies prove anything?
{Take this little test. Be honest with yourself!}
"Quacks?... Rip-offs?... Misguided?... Mistaken people most of them?"
Now, what if:
Would you think..., "Hmmm! What a coincidence?... How curious?"
NOW YOU UNDERSTAND!
A COMMON INGREDIENT SUGGESTS THAT THESE THERAPIES MUST HAVE VALIDITY, (TO SOME DEGREE!)
THE PEIRCE POSTULATE:
ALTERNATIVE FOODS/SUPPLEMENTS/SUBSTANCES ARE PROVEN TO HAVE MEDICAL EFFICACY BY THE FOLLOWING VARIABLES.
Low Probability of efficacy
1) Three claims of efficacy to a disease
2) Three different substances
3) One common ingredient ( suspected as active)
4) Claims can’t be made by people who are connected or know each other in any way.
5) Claims can’t be made by anybody directly selling a product
6) Claims should be by either researcher, patient, or practitioner
7) Any two invitro or animal studies supporting efficacy of the active ingredient
Moderate Probability of efficacy
1) Four claims of efficacy to a disease
2) Four different substances
3) One common ingredient (suspected as active)
4) Claims can’t be made by connected parties
5) Claims can’t be made by people directly profiting from a product
6) Claims should be by either researcher, patient, or practitioner
7) Any two invitro or animal studies supporting efficacy of active ingredient.
High Probability of Efficacy
1) Five claims of efficacy to a disease
2) Five different substances
3) One common ingredient,…and 4) through 7)
Very High Probability of Efficacy
1) Six claims of efficacy to a disease 2) Six different substances 3) One common ingredient,…and 4) through 7)
Absolute Proof of Efficacy
1) Seven or more claims of efficacy to a disease
2) Seven or more different substances
3) One common ingredient, …and 4) through 7)
And in reality, it's more like a dozen different people touting a dozen vastly different therapies and still every single therapy has an identicle molecule or element.
*Toxicity concerns would then be the only limiting factor for full FDA support. Toxicity studies are so much cheaper and easier to do than double blind placebo studies, however seeing that they are food substances toxicity requirements needed to classify a substance as therapeutic should be changed.
However, for cancer, one thing is certain,... nothing can be more toxic than cancer!
