Historians of evidence-based medicine (EBM) often identify its beginnings with David Sackett from 1986, and with Archie Cochrane shortly after. Within a short period of time, EBM became the norm, and has changed many facets of clinical medicine. 1 EBM is now operationalised by synthesising knowledge from randomised controlled trials (RCT) and observational studies -often using the GRADE schema. 2 What is evidence? Cambridge Dictionary simply defines it as: "one or more reasons for believing that something is or is not true". 3 This implies that an 'objective or impartial evidence' exists. Is that true? It is obvious that evidence is never 'static' -it changes and reflects its time. However 'post-modernists' argue that all evidence represent social constructions and cannot be absolute or neutral. 4 This rejects claims to objective knowledge or true representation of reality. Many scientists are also sceptical about 'absolute truth', but often more optimistically argue that science moves asymptotically toward the 'truth'. A 'bias' in this regard is a systematic non-random deviation from the 'truth'. Some argue that EBM is undermined by specific biases from corrupting influences of corporations that commercialise academia.When authors are not transparent, this further challenges beliefs in the validity of 'evidence'. Unless such power bias is corrected, EBM remains threatened. 5 Nevertheless, others respond that appropriately designed, conducted, and reported RCTs represent a gold standard in evaluating healthcare interventions. 6 It is universally acknowledged that RCTs yield biased results if lacking methodological rigour. Research consumers need complete, clear and transparent reporting of methodology and findings -especially potential biases.