1. Sounds as if you have a bit of an ax to grind.

2. RE: Your demand that "I want an (sic) *written* test that can be administered then graded and assessed by ANY certified INDEPENDENT scientific facility/lab -- a test that will VOUCH UNEQUIVOCALLY that the person (depending on which variant test(s) are performed) can distinguish Right from Wrong, and/or has unimpaired mental acuity, knowledge, wits."

Gee, you're right; there isn't one. If that makes your point, fine.

PS: I also haven't found such a test -- or any test -- for various forms of heart disease, dementia, dizziness, and back problems. I guess that kind of ambiguity is what separates medicine from, say, basic arithmetic and Mister Spock's computer-esque logic. But that doesn't mean I'm going to cancel my next cardiology appointment or stop taking my Zocor.

3. One of my professors was an excellent evaluator of research methodology. In his process of mercilessly critiquing papers for grants and publications, he also gave credit to the thousands of clinicians and researchers who at least try to tackle hard-to-define questions (and sometimes devote large chunks of their careers to them), but who almost never accomplish a "perfect" study or find a "final" answer. His point, for professionals and armchair critics alike when they heap sophomoric criticism on someone else's honest work, was often to tell the critic to go and do a better study.

Have at it.

4. Finally, this is the Law & Ethics forum. If you want to argue diagnostic research, you might want to try a different venue.