Whether Cameron’s case will prove to be a cautionary tale for other “Lyme literate” doctors remains to be seen. Even as one branch of state government successfully prosecutes a “Lyme literate” doctor, another branch, the legislature, is considering forcing insurers to cover treatment of “chronic Lyme,” the subject of no less than three bills now pending. ( Assembly Bill 114 , Senate Bill 4713 , Senate Bill 670 ). Three other bills are sympathetic to the cause in that they will give “chronic Lyme” advocates yet another venue to argue for insurance coverage. ( Assembly Bill 4863 , Senate Bill 2168 , Assembly Bill 6927 ). Pseudoscience, it seems, is endemic in the state of New York.
The number of treatment units (subjects or groups of subjects) assigned to control and treatment groups, affects an RCT's reliability. If the effect of the treatment is small, the number of treatment units in either group may be insufficient for rejecting the null hypothesis in the respective statistical test . The failure to reject the null hypothesis would imply that the treatment shows no statistically significant effect on the treated in a given test . But as the sample size increases, the same RCT may be able to demonstrate a significant effect of the treatment, even if this effect is small.