What a tough customer you are!
I just w2onder if it is worth several hours of my time to search references that would satisfy you.
Now that you've advanced your thesis to the mud-slinging, name-calling stage, I think it probably would not result in any more acceptance.
Instead, I'm going to bail out of your arguement.
You just are not listening.
And not thinking about what little you've not tuned out.

"Again- if you make quack-ish sounding health claims on the internet, it's up to you to prove what you've just said. Not say 'the evidence is out there."

I agree with this, but realize it'll never happen. The proliferation of pseudo-science on the internet (see: curezone website, etc) means that every whackjob out there can point to 100 other websites of dubious scientific value, and it just sort of goes around like a merry-go-round. Unfortunately, people treat stuff like this as a religion, and it's sort of pointless to argue with them or ask for actual Science.

It's sort of fascinating, actually.

Myself, I drink kombucha because it tastes good and it doesn't seem to have any negative health effects. I don't bother with the b.s. magickal mystery thinking that seems to surround it.

OK, Alchemy, you wanted a citation Alchemy; I'll give you one. Look at the Paul Stammets article link at the top of this page. Stammets states that Kambucha is an anti-biotic. Stammets states that Kambucha has a high PH so serves as an anti-amoebic, not unlike apple cider vinegar in it's ability to keep down stomach parasites. Stammets states that a greater than 10% sugar concentration, as well as the (small) alchohol content serve to keep down invasive molds. Stammets cites some lab studies.
You've got to love a guy like Paul Stammets. He started out as a 'delic 'shroom hound and has since morphed into a high-demand celebrity on the lecture circuit. You've got to love a guy who has come up with a startling new revelation --- namely that life on Earth probably was kick started by fungal spores floating in from outer space.

Man too is a symbiotic being. Humankind is host to numerous microorganisma... most of which are benevolent. Most of our individual "bugs" and "cooties" help us interact with other lifeforms. Each persons team of microorganisms form a protective shield, as part of our immune system, against other groups and other combinations of microorganisms that woulde invade. this is biology and probiotic and the sacred hoop of life. -- all things connected. Sterility and conducting clinicaly sterile tests is not the point. When you first get a baby kambucha you need to handle it to let it get acquainted with your particular set of microorganisms. And it will adapt to you and produce a special cocktail of substances for you.
In the case of Paul Stammets, who handles many different fungus cultures as a livelihood, he is host to probably quite a few cultures not carried by the normal person. It is no wonder that (according to the article) his attempts to raise kambucha were soon invaded by diverse molds from his household.

Look, I'm not claiming that Kambucha can cure life threatening diseases.I will however, reassert my own personal claim that Kambucha has kept me from getting the runs in central america while all around me were shitting their brains out. I will claim that Kambucha is anti-biotic and cleans one's insides from throat to kidney to digestives. I will claim that kambucha is a powerful anti-oxidant --- it does have all of the qualifications. And I will claim that Kambucha tastes mighty fine, something even better than champagne, when I brew it right. And I will claim that Kambucha works for me and I like it alot. I hope it works for others as well.

I agree with you that many scientific lab tests are flawed.
Take the example of huge multi-national agroBiz chemical outfits, who have positive lab studies that total prove that genetic1ally modified irradiated food products grown in petrochemical herbicides and pesticides are good for you and good for the planet. WTF?_ Go figure!
I think the only real test is not what some authority says, but if it works for you and you have a good positive experience with it then who can dispute that?

I personally am not a fan of kombucha. I have made it and intutively it did not resonate with me. A few years after I stopped drinking it (and mind you I am a fermenation nut, I ferment everything except for this), I read Paul Stametz's article and since I do respect his opinion and it matched my experience to some degree I started referring people to his article as a resource, so they could make their own decision. I also emailed Sandor Katz about this and wondered what his thoughts were, he said that it has always been counter intuitive to him to use white sugar and black tea as a base to promote health. So I am not asking anyone to agree or disagree, but I do believe it is important for us to have all the information in order to make a sound decision about whether we want to ingest something or not. I personally choose not to ingest Kombucha. I am not convinced it is the panacea that people claim, and I have enough hestitation that I suspect it may even contribute to health problems. This is my journey and how I came to my decision. If you have come to a different place that is fine.
Blessings
Linda

If your brew comes out smelling like battery acid, and tastes like it too, then you would likely get ill from taking it. --- daily! Look at what happened to that woman in Iowa back in 1994.
But it doesn't have to be that way.

In Paul Stametz' article above, he admits a lack of interest in and understanding of the kambucha culture. Just like making wine or beer, it takes care and interest and attention to create a good brew. It is no surprise, considering his admitted neglect, disinterest and inattention, that his experience with Kambucha was not good.
Still he has cited positive evidence as to its merits.