[Harry Lavo]

wrote in message ...
On May 20, 11:57 am, Ed Seedhouse wrote:
On May 20, 8:33 am, Sonnova wrote:

On Tue, 19 May 2009 16:49:37 -0700, Ed Seedhouse wrote
Well, yes you did, sorry. There are well known mechanisms that allow
that which your experimental protocol didn't rule out.
List them, please.

I have already given some applicable search terms in my previous
posts, which you don't seem to have checked into.

The mechanisms are well known and widely documented. If you don't
want to research them that's your right. It is, however, rather
worrying that you don't already know about them yet are making claims
to have done a "double blind" test.

"Noun 1. double-blind experiment - an experimental procedure in which
neither the subjects of the experiment nor the persons administering
the experiment know the critical aspects of the experiment; "a double-
blind procedure is used to guard against both experimenter bias and
placebo effects" "

What "critical aspects" were known by either the subject or
adminstrator that would prevent Sonova's test from being considered
double blind?

The results, obviously.