The control group is also tested as to complications which might affect
test results, there is a benchmark set for both the control and target
groups for such things as blood lipids, weight, age, activity level, etc.,
depending on the exact nature of what the test is to reveal. As to
surgery and chemo, the control group is people with the same problem but
who don't recieve the device/proceedure under test, again an example of
setting equal benchmarks for both so differences will depend on the
difference in outcomes. Sometimes in surgery, a "false" incision is made
in more simple proceedures/devices in order to remove any difference
knowing one has or has not recieved that which is being tested. For
example testing some med release device by implanting it in a simple
incision, but some actually get it and some don't. The point in all such
testing is to remove all but the difference that is being applied as much
as is possible in both control and target groups.
Quoted message said:Quoted message said:Displaying a total lack of the use of research,ie. the control group, who
participate along side the "sick" people. Anti science ignorance is
common and praised in some circles; as research shows.What evidence do you have that the "control" group isn't also
compromised, yet without the overt symptoms displayed by the study
group? Taken as a whole, people in wealthy and industrialized societies
aren't very healthy, and to do a true "side by side" comparison of a
treatment that is always damaging anyway, like heart surgery, or chemo,
obviously won't be conducted upon someone who doesn't need it. So, what
exactly is your point? ;^]--
_o Kristofer Dale,
_ \<,_ ragged individualist,
_____( )/ ( )_____ statistic at large...p.s. Learn and live, http://www.vitaletherapeutics.org