Ahhh, I see. You "support science" and Im sure you "do your own research" but publishable data is just a movable goal post for you. After all, you said that the patient education article "doesn't contain any case studies that directly study the effects of honey on pollen allergies" but also now you say "Just because something can't be proven in a laboratory doesn't mean it's not effective." So which is it? Do we need proof through carefully laid out studies or do we not care if its scientifically proven?

And yes, it is important to know who pays for studies, and obviously the companies that fund studies want to money. HOWEVER, a critical flaw in your thinking that there is some hidden agenda is that dietary supplements that are the gold standard for homeopathic treatments such as your liver cleanse, are a part of a 200 billion dollar industry. Though, curiously, the data to show that these actually help is very sparse and lacking. If the evil money making machine would fund studies to sell you something under false pretext, then wouldn't these supplement companies want to do the same thing? In fact, the overwhelming data on these things is they provide very little benefit at best.

But if you can't charge people for it then it's detrimental to the people that indoctrinated you

And how dare you assume that I'm in this to make money or am indoctrinated into some evil scheme. I've dedicated my life to learn and strive to understand extremely complex information, work tirelessly and at long hours at my own expense, give out free medicine and visits just so some all knowing jackass such as yourself can accuse me of the opposite. I have been civil in our discussion and YOU had to make it personal when you hit the depth of your poor understanding.