A major factor related to the inconsistency of published works in the thermographic imaging field is the various protocols under which the procedures is performed. Although not difficult, the protocol of the examination, a with x-ray or any other diagnostic device, is essential to accurate and reliable outcome. When I taught the diplomate course for thermography in California, physicians were asked to submit thermographic studies as part of their completion requirements. For example, performing the procedure on tile flooring which by its cold temperature, caused abnormal sympathetic heating responses in the subject under evaluation. A carpeted floor is required.
Protocol is everything.
Without an internationally accepted protocol, no comparison of accuracy, double blinded study, or evaluation of the technology and its effectiveness can be made. With the wide ranging opinion of thermographers and pseudo-thermographers concerning appropriate protocol, it is no wonder that many studies performed worldwide do not correlate, while other studies performed to a stringent protocol are so very consistent. It is very important to differentiate scientific fact from anecdotal evidence. For purposes of this paper I define anecdotal to mean a myth or a fable not supported by fact, but accepted because of a common belief or usage. Many physicians and investigative journalists use anecdotal data to support their point of view.