Only 1 way to figure out: test it on (consenting) new patients. The drugs are generic (so cheap), and don’t have intolerable side effects. It has anecdotally worked. So it’s positive EV for patients with terminal prognosis. And yet its explained away as a curious ‘spontaneous’ remission, using your very valid objection.
This is after all my bigger claim / criticism of the status quo. My objective is to make a meta-level criticism more so than to advocate for one particular protocol as the potential cure. My claim is that a medical system that acted with urgency and that wanted to maximize patient survival odds, would have at the very least attempted to replicate the protocol in a Phase II clinical trial. Instead, it was ignored due to status quo bias. Not because it lacked a scientific justification, but because the drugs are generic.
In other words, I use the lack of a replication attempt to update in favor of systemic issues in oncology and FDA.
Yes. I argued that the causes for the malaise are over-determined, and medical liability and close-mindedness are both reasons. There are integrative and functional doctors who are more willing to prescribe off-label medications. But they are rare and I haven’t researched them in depth yet.
But if there were 10x more clinical trial results, there’d be a greater universe from which one could prescribe off-label medications, and the quality of off-label recommendations would be higher. And the FDA certainly is a blocker there.