>
Experiments are reproducibleNot nitpicking (at least that's not my intent), just adding: Only if you know what the variables are.
This occurred to me because I'm myself an interesting medical case beating even a professor of medicine's prediction, as well as independent ones from various doctors about other things that turned out to be symptoms of the same underlying chronic poisoning issue that I had to diagnose myself, and only then find the right specialist for it. There has been sooo much interesting stuff going on in my body during years of slow recovery (and a few "miracles" that left doctors literally speechless), but I would not be able to say how you could repeat the "experiment". Too little is known about any of what goes on inside me right now, my doctor (researcher at university clinic) has long ago admitted that we left the area of known study-supported medicine behind.
I suspect a few mechanisms based on observing myself that I have no way and no idea how to prove. So I'm of course not certain what I can claim, or what exactly happened, but neither would I know how to repeat my personal experiment even if human experiments were possible. It's just too much unknown territory. And in the end my experiences will all be lost, unfortunately.
An example for something I suspect: Some diseases like the common cold may not always be orthogonal and superfluous. In my case, over the years, I got more and more the impression that it actively helped my body to get rid of what was stored over decades. I suspect that everything is much more intertwined and connected and not separate. One prediction I could make based on this suspicion is that if we were to be able to eliminate mild diseases like the cold completely we would get more serious diseases or other issues down the road. That's not a practical experiment though, maybe some large-scale observational studies can get some hints one way or the other, but it will be too messy and too uncertain for anything even close to a definite proof or disproof.
Another thing I suspect is that even very low level exposure (far below officially allowed levels) to heavy metals has very real consequences - it's just that on an individual basis we are almost utterly unable to show it. We can do it only on a population basis, and we all know how messy that is with all the known and unknown confounders.