Pigment Corrective

[toddphillips123]

I'm actually not suggesting any method, but comments from an unknown nobody on youtube about scientific research is kinda...irrational.

[fendergibs]

the scientific method & double blinded studies is not anything i can take credit for, as it was designed long before my time. Anyone can look up these proven method themselves. rational people can get Ideas from anywhere , as long as they back up these ideas wiith there own research, from mutiple sources. it IS irrational to use youtube if u think it its irrational, so you defeated yourself by your own stament.

[fendergibs]

Again where is the double blinded clinical data to prove this claim? this would be the easiest to show case in before and after photos, why as this not been done. Testimony by patient's is not clinically significant data as it is subject to the placebo effect. therefore when he states 85% saw improvement that is meaningless given biasis and the placebo effect. We need to see double blinded before and after photos, not theoretical, non-clinical, unsubstantiated claims.

[toddphillips123]

No-one cares about your dumb experimental jargon.

[fendergibs]

thanks, I wish I could take credit for the scientific method that is used as a gold standard to prove the effectiveness of any medication or scientific product. But I can't, this was developed for decades ago and is the gold standard in all medical journals today. Which you call "dumb experimental jargon", congratulations.

[toddphillips123]

No, Congratulations to you on posting comments that are worthless.

[fendergibs]

yes the scientific method & statically significance studies are "worthless", let's throw them out all & do it your way. congrats! consider a job in rational thought & scientific research.