Blog
Plain-language writing on what we measure and why — the methods, the modalities, and the contested claims we put under blinded, pre-registered test. No hype, no mechanisms asserted, and the null results published alongside everything else.
The instrument panel — phone-camera HRV, voice biomarkers and tracked goals inside a cluster of eight — every reading treated as an imperfect proxy, and the cases where nothing changed published too. Read →
Locking the hypothesis and analysis before the data, on a public registry — and publishing the nulls, because hiding them is how a field fools itself. Read →
The Imperial College continuous-infusion method, what it is and isn't, and why Ashta studies it as a research state rather than a cure. Read →
The real cardiac risk, the screening responsible work requires, and an honest read of the early evidence. Read →
The sealed-box, forced-choice design — pre-registered, blinded, scored only after unblinding, null expected. Read →
The 40%-versus-25% claim, the strongest critiques, the mixed replications — and how Ashta would test it under blinded, pre-registered conditions. Read →
Why the evidence is largely negative — including Schwartz's own double-blind null — and why Ashta tests it anyway and publishes either way. Read →
Why eight is a test unit, not a proven mechanism — the mixed distant-intention literature, the missing replication, and how Ashta would measure it. Read →
The honest case for testing contested claims (the ether, radionics, structured water) as hypotheses — measure the effect, never endorse the mechanism. Read →
The full per-claim protocols are live: read the Schrödinger's Crystal Skull experiment and telephone telepathy & the Tuned app in full. Still in build: applied kinesiology (awaiting the muscle-testing instrument), the clusters-of-eight design, and the natural-philosophy traditions we put under test.
