CYDY has always shouldered the burden of having more successful anecdotal data than trial data (especially in COVID and cancer). For the doctors on this board, when, in your opinion does anecdotal data actually become more than than just anecdotal data? I ask this because this is one of the things that has baffled me for years. Any person with half a brain can look at the data generated from the many trials and EINDS and easily come to the conclusion that LL works. We may not know the exact mechanism, but we know it works in a majority of the population and does not have any adverse advents. If someone is on a ventilator for 30-60 days, has tried multiple other therapies with no success, receives LL and then suddenly gets better. Then there is some mechanism with LL that helped that person. The odds that person got better just by chance is almost zero. Granted, if that only happened one time, I get it, it's anecdotal. But when it happens multiple times, it no longer ceases to be anecdotal. It's crazy to me there is not one person at the FDA screaming at the top of their lungs, LL works, someone has to figure out a way to help out CYDY!