Pandolfi and Carreras stated that the outcome, that is: the ‘p-value’, of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is over-estimated [1]. In the case of complementary alternative medicine (CAM) it should not overturn disbelief in implausible methods. We agree that statistics should not be over-rated, and that CAM methods should not be accepted after a single or a few RCTs. But Pandolfi and Carreras over-rate Bayesian statistics in stating that Bayesian statistics rectify disregarding proof for CAM.
