Calling all professional Dousers, Psychics, Astrologers, Energy Healers, Palm Readers

[taishon]

I want to conduct some double-blind experiments testing these disciplines. Basically, its my belief that if you are making money for your services and your are not marketing them as entertainment then you should be willing to have it tested under controlled conditions. If you are unwilling do that why ? For comparison, would you be willing to take your car to a mechanic or any other professional practicioner who refused to have their work verified ? If interested please reply, if not interested please tell me why.

[leela8]

I'm not any of those things, but the way you have worded your post would not attract any takers, I expect.

Rather than expressing sincere scientific interest, you appear more antagonistic and adversarial.

I imagine many genuine practitIoners of those arts would be eager to have their talents measured scientifically so far as they are measurable (and there have been many such studies) but not by someone who has already suggested, somewhat belligerently that s(he already believes they are a bunch of unwilling, overvalued frauds.

You are of course entitled to your opinion of these practices, and are certainly not obliged to make use of them. I don't see the purpose in baiting a community of people with a derisive commentary on their chosen professions, thinly veiled as a scientific challenge.

[taishon]

Its tragically amusing how immediately hostile and insulting people get when you state (no matter how matter of factly) a desire to have it tested. Whatever vast and erroneous interpretation of my tone you want to make..the fact is, if you are charging $$ for it and not calling it entertainment than you should be comfortable with having it tested. After all, if you are that confident that such claims are real, then using a non-subjective test would be desirable validation. If you think that such disciplines are outside of scientific scrutiny then don't package them as being rational disciplines. (Package them as entertainment or some kind of performance art).

Malou- are you assuming I haven't been well versed in psychic studies ? Your post seemed incredibly assumptive..you really don't know what my background is.The biggest skeptics (even ones more skeptical than me) started out believing and being immersed in the disciplines. Malou..what do you know about the Scientific Method ? It definitely applies here.

Want a more Humanistic analogy ? Ok..since we are dealing with human interaction why not compare it counseling or psychology ? Would you be willing to pay an exhorbitant fee to consult one of these disciplines if there is no evidence that they work ? (Marriage counselors tend to have the least success BTW).

Leela8- Wow ! There are so many misquotes and vindictive claims I don't forsee any rational logical dialogue with you. The 'eagerness' of genuinely talented professionals to be tested should be independent of my personal opinion and only dependent on the test being fair and objective. Yes, there have been many studies and I challenge you to come up with one valid study that verifies the claims made by these disciplines. NOT the same thing as saying that things like Psychic powers are false but providing plenty of evidence that making money peddling these claims deserves skepticism.

BTW My personal belief is that there are many things beyond what current Science can explain and there are things of extreme value that aren't Science. I am skeptical (which is very healthy and rational) about the claims I want to test but I absolutely will alter my skepticism based on rational, objective testing results.

The things I've said are only 'baiting' if you are insecure about your beliefs in these claims. My motivation is to apply the Scientific Method to something real.

[stuartdole]

@taishon: Are you setting up an actual experiment and compensating people (dowsers, psychics) for their time? What's your experimental design? Has it been approved by a Human Subject panel? (Psychics are humans.) What's your level of funding?

What might be more fun for you is to take some (more? different?) dowsing or psychic training and get a feel for how it works, then use that to inform your experimental design. Or go to a dowsing conference - you'll see lots of testing and challenges going on.

Incidentally, I have never asked to have my mechanic's work "verified" - it's usually really easy to tell (car runs smoothly, I can examine the parts that were removed), and he's honest about things that stump him. Similarly, when I do spiritual work it's usually really easy to tell if it was successful (pain level reduced, anxiety gone), and I'm honest with my clients about things that stump me.

(Well, I can think of mechanical work I've had done at certain dealerships that *should* have been "verified"!)

PS: I see others have already replied, and you've responded. So, what has been your training and experience?

I want to conduct some double-blind experiments testing these disciplines. Basically, its my belief that if you are making money for your services and your are not marketing them as entertainment then you should be willing to have it tested under controlled conditions. If you are unwilling do that why ? For comparison, would you be willing to take your car to a mechanic or any other professional practicioner who refused to have their work verified ? If interested please reply, if not interested please tell me why.

[taishon]

First off, thank you for not replying in a hostile or irrational manner..that gets old even if it is irritatingly amusing. To answer your first paragraph;

1. Absolutely no compensation or reimbursement though, if the data indicate validity then you will get a die hard testimonial from me and, by association, and the influence of many respected individuals. Why is compensation necessary ? I can think of several professional positions I have held where I demonstrated my skill for free. In fact, I think compensation might hinder the validity in minor ways.

2. Taking classes and learning the disciplines would make the procedure less valid. It is better that I know less about how it is theoretically supposed to work. What is important is that I know the Scientific Method well. Human subject panel is irrelevant unless I am going to publish a paper in Scientific American or some such. The experimental design would have to be agreed on by me and the subject being tested and would have to be based on sound double-blind science which is pretty independent of discipline and well-practiced. Basically, I would do the following;

1. Ask the subject what they definitely claim they are able to do
2. Decide if their claims have an actual false test (Scientists never truly prove things right under all conditions). If I get one controlled, valid positive result that can only be explained by some kind of Psychic explanation you will get a lifelong devotee and advocate.
3. If the claims have no false test (ie- you couch the discipline in enough nebulous and fuzzy terminology or conditions that it can't be tested using the Scientific Method) then I can't test it and either (1) It is not science but Psuedoscientific belief or something that Science has not yet evolved to measure or verify.

I don't doubt that many Psychics do good. A client will feel more positive about their life, get help grieving etc but that feeling often breaks down with reality or true motivations (selfishness) get buried behind fuzziness and denial. If you have a good track record of making your clients needs met/life better over the long term with no net rebounding serious negatives, then more power to you. Keep in mind that, falsely believing that a naked king is clothed in beautiful robes is self-denial and only has the appearance of something good.

I am not out to discredit those who truly desire to help others, have a good track record comparable to their financial gains, and whose clients don't suffer because of their practice. I do want to discredit those who make money by making claims they don't deliver, practice psychological manipulation for personal gain (ie- dishonest salesmanship) etc etc and those that outright swindle or have a high failure rate (ie- bad record tracking abducted children after charging the terrified parents gobs of cash etc). I AM keenly interested in seeing any positive results that hold up under scientific scrutiny.

If you are really skilled at using Psuedoscience techniques (Astrology, Dousing etc) to help clients and you don't make a bunch of false claims (eg "I am not sure why this works and I don't know if its truly some time of mysterious energy phenom but it seems to really work.") then I wouldn't try to discredit you.

Only in the non-science world do you get so much credit for having a high failure %. Example- lets say you are making psychic predictions (whether its palm reading, fortune telling etc etc), and only one out 10 are really accurate, people will call you amazing because you have a non-skeptical audience who seeks you out. Nostradamus was amazing, not because he got so much right but because he made so incredibly many bad predictions only a few of which were accurate, and got so much post-humous credit. Imagine the weather report being right only 10% of the time (national weather report averages are spot on at least 80% and we still complain constantly).

My qualifications- lets just say I have a firm grounding in the Scientific Method. Whether I am an authorized authority (I am- I have been a published science researcher) is irrelevant and I fully willing to allow any results to be peer reviewed (by scientists and non-scientists alike) What really matters is whether we can agree on a controlled experiment that would qualify as valid by the very well developed protocals of Science. I am sure that I can come up with Science 'experts' that you may consider more qualified than me to give their time freely to oversee any experiment. In any case, I would use the results mainly for the education of my students rather than some nationally or internationally published periodical.

This is what is so incredible different between science (at least good science) and just about any other discipline. A good scientist, when issued this challenge would say "yes..please test my claims over and over and over again..I want them to be verified before I publish/market/make promises etc" (yes there are bad scientists out there that don't do that but far rarer than any other human endeavor).

@taishon: Are you setting up an actual experiment and compensating people (dowsers, psychics) for their time? What's your experimental design? Has it been approved by a Human Subject panel? (Psychics are humans.) What's your level of funding?

What might be more fun for you is to take some (more? different?) dowsing or psychic training and get a feel for how it works, then use that to inform your experimental design. Or go to a dowsing conference - you'll see lots of testing and challenges going on.

Incidentally, I have never asked to have my mechanic's work "verified" - it's usually really easy to tell (car runs smoothly, I can examine the parts that were removed), and he's honest about things that stump him. Similarly, when I do spiritual work it's usually really easy to tell if it was successful (pain level reduced, anxiety gone), and I'm honest with my clients about things that stump me.

(Well, I can think of mechanical work I've had done at certain dealerships that *should* have been "verified"!)

PS: I see others have already replied, and you've responded. So, what has been your training and experience?

[sonomawineandroses]

I want to conduct some double-blind experiments testing these disciplines. Basically, its my belief that if you are making money for your services and your are not marketing them as entertainment then you should be willing to have it tested under controlled conditions. If you are unwilling do that why ? For comparison, would you be willing to take your car to a mechanic or any other professional practicioner who refused to have their work verified ? If interested please reply, if not interested please tell me why.

I am an energy healer. I may be willing to submit to your tests, however I am wondering about the validity of your tests. I can refer you to 10 people who have come to me for various ailments in the last month that will tell you they felt partial or complete relief of their symtoms and a heightened sense of well being. How do you substantiate that with your "test"?

[taishon]

I am an energy healer. I may be willing to submit to your tests, however I am wondering about the validity of your tests. I can refer you to 10 people who have come to me for various ailments in the last month that will tell you they felt partial or complete relief of their symptoms and a heightened sense of well being. How do you substantiate that with your "test"?

Thank you for this response. Whether we can test what you claim depends on what you claim. If you are not using drugs, specific physical therapies, psychological protocols do you claim that what you do involves manipulations of physical energies ? Do you claim that it is far more than a placebo effect ? I would need to know exactly how you do what you do and what you claim is the actual mechanism happening. Eye witness testimony is not enough and can be easily explained by phenomena other than some kind of psychic energy manipulation.

I am really looking for a specific physical test that, if positive results are indicated, would be strong evidence of causes that cannot be explained by conventional science and rational (ie- psychic energy or such). For example, if you claim that you have a patient with a certain disease or condition (cancer, rash etc) who claims that they are physically doing better after being your patient then, theoretically, we could put cultures of the disease (cancer cells etc) in test tubes and have you do energy healing on the test tubes. If we get positive results that are way beyond statistical variation, then the evidence is very excitingly positive in your favor. If you claim you need the human vessel (patient) then there would be not specific isolated test and it wouldn't be double blind BUT you could examine patient charts to see if the disease/physical condition dramatically improves in the same time period they have been your client.

Note that it can't be a general condition such as back pain which can easily be explained as a placebo effect. It has to be something objectively measurable (dramatically higher T cell counts in patients etc). To use actual patients in a testimony would be a much bigger project requiring legalities etc.

As a side note, my understanding of energy healing is that, in order for it to work, the healer must have a genuine desire to and empathy with the patient (this varies from traditional medicine where the doctor/nurse can be incredibly selfish and still prescribe treatments that work). Do you offer your services, sometimes, for free to needy clients who can't afford it ? If not, why not ? Many doctors and nurses volunteer their time for free as well as pay.

Thank you for your consideration.

[natalie]

Would someone be so kind as to tell me what a "douser" is? Thank you!

[alanora]

Would someone be so kind as to tell me what a "douser" is? Thank you!

Historically dousing most often used to locate water in underground aquifer. The practitioner uses a rod held loosely in the hand the movement of which indicates the presence of water.

[SusanC]

You seem to be very "stuck" in the "scientific method." And, you seem to be unwilling to talk about your credentials (any one can get published these days - this does not a legitimate "researcher" make). It seems that you are very angry about people charging for what they talk about being able to do. If you had a bad experience then part of that fault lies with you - and not doing your homework - thoroughly checking out (as one would a surgeon or mechanic) the reputation of the practitioner

There are problems with the scientific method that are well recognized by people who are trying to study non-scientific practices (see Radin, D; Entangled Minds for example) yet many of these practices - particularly in the "energy healers" category have been accepted by the general scientific community. Accupuncture being one of the best known.

How many medical doctors have gone and taken a weekend course (instead of the 3 year program) so they could "offer" this service to their patients because the patients are demanding and paying for this service? Does "Western Medicine" meet your criteria for testing? How about all of the "medicines" that have been dispensed by "doctors" and done ridiculous amounts of harm....

Unless you are going to submit to a human subjects approval process, and unless you are going to be very clear about your methods and make your research design public - at least to potential subjects and to a human subjects committee, no one should submit to your proposal.

[taishon]

You seem to be very "stuck" in the "scientific method." And, you seem to be unwilling to talk about your credentials (any one can get published these days - this does not a legitimate "researcher" make). It seems that you are very angry about people charging for what they talk about being able to do. If you had a bad experience then part of that fault lies with you - and not doing your homework - thoroughly checking out (as one would a surgeon or mechanic) the reputation of the practitioner

There are problems with the scientific method that are well recognized by people who are trying to study non-scientific practices (see Radin, D; Entangled Minds for example) yet many of these practices - particularly in the "energy healers" category have been accepted by the general scientific community. Accupuncture being one of the best known.

How many medical doctors have gone and taken a weekend course (instead of the 3 year program) so they could "offer" this service to their patients because the patients are demanding and paying for this service? Does "Western Medicine" meet your criteria for testing? How about all of the "medicines" that have been dispensed by "doctors" and done ridiculous amounts of harm....

Unless you are going to submit to a human subjects approval process, and unless you are going to be very clear about your methods and make your research design public - at least to potential subjects and to a human subjects committee, no one should submit to your proposal.

There are so many fallacies of logic and bad assumptions in your post that I am not sure its productive to respond. Essential you are using starting to use Ad Hominen and irrelevant arguments to conclude that what I am proposing is not valid.

I think I will only respond to three things;

1. Energy Healing (if you define as the manipulation of 'energy fields' at a distance) is NOT accepted as being valid by the 'general science community'. There have been Many controlled studies done and the results have shown plenty of evidence that Energy Healing produces no more statistical response than traditional compassionate care methods (where the patient gets some response explained by psychological comfort being attended to by other people). There is plenty of Bad Science being conducted in the Medical community (remote prayer studies for example) and there are plenty of bad and erroneous practices being conducted by the medical community but thats not what I am testing here. Other practices that can be put into the energy healing category have shown promise but none of them have ruled out fairly conventional Scientific explanations. There was a large study done on Chi Gung that showed long-term praticioners with AIDS had higher T-cell counts and survival rates than non practicioners (wish I knew how to spell better :0). That does not automatically mean some kind of nebulous psychic energy phenomena. It does imply that Chi Gung, like a number of meditative personal physical practices works well. I have done Tai Chi, Yoga etc and I can attest that they do wonders that Trad Medicine doesn't seem able to do well. That is nothing close to the idea of using 'action at a distance' energy manipulation.

2. I cannot be clear about how I am going to conduct the experiment until I know exactly what a subject claims they can do and what they claim as their methods. There are no problems with conducting the SM on non-scientific claims because there is no SM way of testing them. For example, I can test to see if dousing can find things but I cannot test the claim that it finds things because of psychic energy because that is truly beyond science. What IS important is that we use correct and valid SM protocals that the subject and I can agree too. There are plenty of people who have plenty of credentials who practice bad science. I am not be overly open about my background because I really believe any personal information is just an excuse for Ad Hominen attacks and I get really tired and disgusted with them. Ultimately, regardless of my credentials, peer review would easily validate or dispute whether I would be using correct methods and whether the results would be valid.

3. I am not 'stuck' on the SM in my life as a whole..I am stuck on it for the purpose of testing the title lines claims. I think, so far, I've gotten one reasonable, rational response to my original post which implies, to me, that there really is a wall of irrational defensiveness with regard to these professions. I very much want to hold people accountable for charging for their services (as I have been held accountable for making money for my services...I actually quit a job because I was making a lot of money for doing something that my clients should have been able to do for themselves).

I am not out to bait or harm or piss off (those seem to be the inevitable irrational reactions I get when I test people's belief systems, especially when they make money on them). I am out to help provide better standards of validation for psuedoscientific claims. Fact is, if a subject is rational and respectful then I will do my best to reciprocate and I really would try to honor any wishes of the subject towards what I did with the results.

Last comment..none of the questions I have posted are rhetorical. I honestly want responses to them and I will be open to whatever responses I get.

[leela8]

Wow is right, taishon. I felt not a shred of hostility or vindictiveness when I posted; my intention
was to point out that the tone of your original post could easily be read as antagonistic and biased, and counterproductive to your intention. It is easy to misread tone in this format. I apologize.
And you certainly misread me, as you rather reamed a new one in your reply.

Its tragically amusing how immediately hostile and insulting people get when you state (no matter how matter of factly) a desire to have it tested. Whatever vast and erroneous interpretation of my tone you want to make..the fact is, if you are charging $$ for it and not calling it entertainment than you should be comfortable with having it tested. After all, if you are that confident that such claims are real, then using a non-subjective test would be desirable validation. If you think that such disciplines are outside of scientific scrutiny then don't package them as being rational disciplines. (Package them as entertainment or some kind of performance art).

Malou- are you assuming I haven't been well versed in psychic studies ? Your post seemed incredibly assumptive..you really don't know what my background is.The biggest skeptics (even ones more skeptical than me) started out believing and being immersed in the disciplines. Malou..what do you know about the Scientific Method ? It definitely applies here.

Want a more Humanistic analogy ? Ok..since we are dealing with human interaction why not compare it counseling or psychology ? Would you be willing to pay an exhorbitant fee to consult one of these disciplines if there is no evidence that they work ? (Marriage counselors tend to have the least success BTW).

Leela8- Wow ! There are so many misquotes and vindictive claims I don't forsee any rational logical dialogue with you. The 'eagerness' of genuinely talented professionals to be tested should be independent of my personal opinion and only dependent on the test being fair and objective. Yes, there have been many studies and I challenge you to come up with one valid study that verifies the claims made by these disciplines. NOT the same thing as saying that things like Psychic powers are false but providing plenty of evidence that making money peddling these claims deserves skepticism.

BTW My personal belief is that there are many things beyond what current Science can explain and there are things of extreme value that aren't Science. I am skeptical (which is very healthy and rational) about the claims I want to test but I absolutely will alter my skepticism based on rational, objective testing results.

The things I've said are only 'baiting' if you are insecure about your beliefs in these claims. My motivation is to apply the Scientific Method to something real.

[stuartdole]

Would someone be so kind as to tell me what a "douser" is? Thank you!

Natalie - a "douser" is someone who puts out fires, usually with water. (I noticed that too!)

[Barry]

1. Energy Healing (if you define as the manipulation of 'energy fields' at a distance) ...

No one has mentioned energy healings "at a distance" before this. The example offered earlier was of acupuncture, which is all too clearly not at distance!


And it's true the energy healings at a distance are offered on WaccoBB.net. For your supposedly un biased purpose here, taishon, I suggest you start with local energy healings.

[Barry]

...If you have a good track record of making your clients needs met/life better over the long term with no net rebounding serious negatives, then more power to you....

This discussion points out some of the difficulties with "proving" efficacy in a wholly objective manner. However what is still of value, is past clients/patients testimonials of their perceived benefits from the treatment (or lack thereof).

Hard Scientific Method (SM) studies use self-reported data (such as the Beck Depression Inventory) as the basis for assessing efficacy of treatment.

The upcoming WaccoBB.net Business Directory will be helpful in this regard. Past clients/patients (of all types of service providers, though alternative medicine will be one the focuses) will be invited to post testimonials about their experience with the service provider.

[mykil]

Would someone be so kind as to tell me what a "douser" is? Thank you!

Dousing has been around since the beginning of time! Water witching is a form of dousing; using a willow stick you can find your water supply underground for sure. Way more may be accomplice with dousing as well. There are stories of solders douching for underground bunkers, find the Japanese before they came out at night. Map douching with a pendulum, there are stories of finding lost souls, dead or alive, dousing for meds is becoming a common everyday task for those that love the pendulum. Dousing goes beyond the norm for sure. There is a group that meets once a month in Sebastopol, as well there are numerous group all over the world that discuss these practices!

[rekarp]

The title of the original post mispelled "dowser." A dowser is a type of divination where the practitioner uses a rod or twig to locate ground water or other types of buried ores and materials, even earth radiation. Some use no equipment at all. It's commonly called water witching.

Ron

Natalie - a "douser" is someone who puts out fires, usually with water. (I noticed that too!)

[taishon]

This discussion points out some of the difficulties with "proving" efficacy in a wholly objective manner. However what is still of value, is past clients/patients testimonials of their perceived benefits from the treatment (or lack thereof).

Hard Scientific Method (SM) studies use self-reported data (such as the Beck Depression Inventory) as the basis for assessing efficacy of treatment.

The upcoming WaccoBB.net Business Directory will be helpful in this regard. Past clients/patients (of all types of service providers, though alternative medicine will be one the focuses) will be invited to post testimonials about their experience with the service provider.

I guess I am looking to set up a 'harder' science study where I examine the actual physical science basis :0) Self-reported testimony is notoriously subject to errors and uncertainties for many of the reasons I mentioned. I want to more directly and objectively test the phenom.

[taishon]

The title of the original post mispelled "dowser." A dowser is a type of divination where the practitioner uses a rod or twig to locate ground water or other types of buried ores and materials, even earth radiation. Some use no equipment at all. It's commonly called water witching.

Ron

It has been spelled both ways (in English language as well as dowsing/dousing circles) and the official dictionary uses both variants so I would be more investigative before you claim its misspelled. (BTW way you misspelled, mispelled :0)

[taishon]

Dousing has been around since the beginning of time! Water witching is a form of dousing; using a willow stick you can find your water supply underground for sure. Way more may be accomplice with dousing as well. There are stories of solders douching for underground bunkers, find the Japanese before they came out at night. Map douching with a pendulum, there are stories of finding lost souls, dead or alive, dousing for meds is becoming a common everyday task for those that love the pendulum. Dousing goes beyond the norm for sure. There is a group that meets once a month in Sebastopol, as well there are numerous group all over the world that discuss these practices!

I am not denigrating this post so I hope you don't take it that way..Many beliefs/practices have been around for a long time without having anything close to the merit they claim. BTW- I hope the soldiers weren't actually "douching" with a pendulum :0)
Thanx for the info..I didn't know how all the ways the practice has been used.

[taishon]

No one has mentioned energy healings "at a distance" before this. The example offered earlier was of acupuncture, which is all too clearly not at distance!


And it's true the energy healings at a distance are offered on WaccoBB.net. For your supposedly un biased purpose here, taishon, I suggest you start with local energy healings.

Thanx for the suggestion. If energy healing is not done 'at a distance' then it qualifies as direct human contact/touch and can be considered to have some of the same benefits as massage/human contact rather than invisible psychic energy manipulations (UNLESS there is dramatic and verifiable physiological/medical/pathological results). I am not unbiased at all...I am very much skeptical of any psychic energy claims and I honestly believe most commercial psychics to be horrible charlatans. HOWEVER, the methods I propose are unbiased (and will, hopefully, lead to a specific unbiased double blind test)

[sonomawineandroses]

I want to conduct some double-blind experiments testing these disciplines. Basically, its my belief that if you are making money for your services and your are not marketing them as entertainment then you should be willing to have it tested under controlled conditions. If you are unwilling do that why ? For comparison, would you be willing to take your car to a mechanic or any other professional practicioner who refused to have their work verified ? If interested please reply, if not interested please tell me why.

Taishon,
I invite you to experience an energy session (no charge) in my studio. Consider it the first step in your investigative process.
Linda

[sonomawineandroses]

Here is a copy of the August issue of Energy Magazine published by the worldwide organization for Healing Touch, a form of Energy Healing accepted and practiced world wide, including in hospitals by doctors and nurses, for over 20 years. Of particular interest may be the section titled "Research" beginning on page 16.
https://www.healingtouchprogram.com/...august2010.pdf

[Braggi]

Taishon,
I invite you to experience an energy session (no charge) in my studio. Consider it the first step in your investigative process.
Linda

But if there's "no charge," where's the energy?

-Jeff

[Bschwad]

A great thread indeed!

Thank you all for posing such strong feelings and thoughts as well. After all, health and healing are, well, some of the most central pieces to our life, if not the most central. So why wouldn't we be passionate?

And Taishon, I applaud your intention. Being familiar with the scientific worldview myself (I was raised in it and in studying to be a doctor, got heavy doses), I see the apparent importance with scientifically verifying energy workers. And I do not discourage you from it. In fact, I would be very interested to see the results.

Seeing that you capitalize Science, only helps to remind that this is a particular stance in the world. One based in certain presumptions about how reality works. Just as many cultures have done through history and continue to do today, the beliefs inherent in the scientific worldview (the need for physical evidence, proving things and holding doubt until proven true, etc) are just that, beliefs. Of course, there is nothing wrong with having beliefs. In fact, it is a much bigger problem not to hold them, but that is in fact a whole other piece of logic to chew. My point here is merely to reflect that Science is a worldview. And a very prevalent one at that.

That said, I believe that rationally it is important to note the shortcomings of double-blind scientific study when looking at health. I have studied with healers in many cultures through out the world. I have worked with mostly Shamanic healers, but also Western doctors, massage therapists, herbalists and more. (Yes, these all overlap.) Science's need for proof can be limiting to the bodies natural ability to heal. Science itself has been increasingly finding that pharmaceutical medicines cannot beat the placebo time and time again. Shamanic healing has known this for years. IN fact, any medicine is provoking natural responses in our body that allow us to finally be healthy. As one of my teachers put it, "medicine's job is to get us in the frame of mind through which health can return" After all, what is our health? Is it a physical composition or a way of relating to our bodies?

Some years ago, I carried out a multi-year study with communities around the world looking at the effects of globalization on local healing traditions. Largely what I was finding is that people were healed by their healers when they believed in it before they went. (At several communities with hundreds of people interviewed, the success rate was 100%!) Similarly, when people did not believe, the success rate was much lower (but not at all 0)...

Now what I found interesting, terrifying and exactly relevant to the stance that you are taking in this realm was the most common story of all: In the majority of communities that I found (from Guatemala, to Kenya, to Thailand, to India and more) the communities were the recipients of well-meaning Westerners' intentions, intentions that resulted in the building of "clinics." The visitors taught everyone how the clinic was, in fact, "better" than their traditional healers, and, at the very least, more modern. (This sort of "behavior change" planning is actually required when receiving most international development grants.) Thus, the people believed the "smart" Americans and stopped going to their local healers. Meanwhile, the clinic was underfunded and could not afford to pay staff nor material fees, and the people are left with no healing options at all when they no longer believed in the local medicine. I wish that this was not the case, but truly, I found it time and time again.

So yes, science can do miraculous things. As it does every day. Still, diminishing belief in health and healing practices does not necessarily aid anything other than the obsessively scientific mind that wants to know "why? and how?" If one believes that something will make them better...than it probably can. If we allow ourselves to belief more, then maybe more will be possible. At least when it comes to health.

Thank you again for your careful consideration of these ideas. A great exercise of the heart and mind.

May you all feel blessed to have healing and may we each feel the miracle of each breath!

[taishon]

A great thread indeed!

Thank you all for posing such strong feelings and thoughts as well. After all, health and healing are, well, some of the most central pieces to our life, if not the most central. So why wouldn't we be passionate?

And Taishon, I applaud your intention. Being familiar with the scientific worldview myself (I was raised in it and in studying to be a doctor, got heavy doses), I see the apparent importance with scientifically verifying energy workers. And I do not discourage you from it. In fact, I would be very interested to see the results.

Seeing that you capitalize Science, only helps to remind that this is a particular stance in the world. One based in certain presumptions about how reality works. Just as many cultures have done through history and continue to do today, the beliefs inherent in the scientific worldview (the need for physical evidence, proving things and holding doubt until proven true, etc) are just that, beliefs. Of course, there is nothing wrong with having beliefs. In fact, it is a much bigger problem not to hold them, but that is in fact a whole other piece of logic to chew. My point here is merely to reflect that Science is a worldview. And a very prevalent one at that.

That said, I believe that rationally it is important to note the shortcomings of double-blind scientific study when looking at health. I have studied with healers in many cultures through out the world. I have worked with mostly Shamanic healers, but also Western doctors, massage therapists, herbalists and more. (Yes, these all overlap.) Science's need for proof can be limiting to the bodies natural ability to heal. Science itself has been increasingly finding that pharmaceutical medicines cannot beat the placebo time and time again. Shamanic healing has known this for years. IN fact, any medicine is provoking natural responses in our body that allow us to finally be healthy. As one of my teachers put it, "medicine's job is to get us in the frame of mind through which health can return" After all, what is our health? Is it a physical composition or a way of relating to our bodies?

Some years ago, I carried out a multi-year study with communities around the world looking at the effects of globalization on local healing traditions. Largely what I was finding is that people were healed by their healers when they believed in it before they went. (At several communities with hundreds of people interviewed, the success rate was 100%!) Similarly, when people did not believe, the success rate was much lower (but not at all 0)...

Now what I found interesting, terrifying and exactly relevant to the stance that you are taking in this realm was the most common story of all: In the majority of communities that I found (from Guatemala, to Kenya, to Thailand, to India and more) the communities were the recipients of well-meaning Westerners' intentions, intentions that resulted in the building of "clinics." The visitors taught everyone how the clinic was, in fact, "better" than their traditional healers, and, at the very least, more modern. (This sort of "behavior change" planning is actually required when receiving most international development grants.) Thus, the people believed the "smart" Americans and stopped going to their local healers. Meanwhile, the clinic was underfunded and could not afford to pay staff nor material fees, and the people are left with no healing options at all when they no longer believed in the local medicine. I wish that this was not the case, but truly, I found it time and time again.

So yes, science can do miraculous things. As it does every day. Still, diminishing belief in health and healing practices does not necessarily aid anything other than the obsessively scientific mind that wants to know "why? and how?" If one believes that something will make them better...than it probably can. If we allow ourselves to belief more, then maybe more will be possible. At least when it comes to health.

Thank you again for your careful consideration of these ideas. A great exercise of the heart and mind.

May you all feel blessed to have healing and may we each feel the miracle of each breath!

Thank you for this post and I agree, based on my own experiences, whole heartedly with what you have said, even without looking at the data. Western Medicine has a poor track record of long-term health management and holistic integrated work (though it does seem to be slowly changing). I would remark though, that we do a great job at managing immediate trauma and providing protection against infectious diseases etc (true..with sometimes bad long-term effects such as the creation of superbugs). It is incredibly rare that people die of malaria in this country while one of the leading causes of death in 'third world' countries is diahrea due to infectious agents.

I really appreciate your post but its not really directly relevant to what I want to test. I want to test very specific claims by what I call, for Brevity's sake, Psychic workers. The problem with not applying some kind of rigor to belief systems is that can lead to incredibly tragic consequences, such as the fundamentalist family that refuses medical care or , the more current and irrational trend of refusing to give family members vaccinations because a ridiculous belief in the link to autism despite the well-documented evidence to the contrary. This silly belief affects a lot more than just your child and I really believe I should be allowed to sue any parents who, through their ignorance, expose my child to diseases that could have easily been prevented by well researched treatments.

In a way, you and I are arguing the same point from opposite sides of the same coin. What I think is tragic is when patients/clients will put the vast majority of resources into non-rigourous psuedosciences when conventional resources hold more promise and a better track record. Use both, by all means, but be skeptical...its healthy.

Thanks again for your post but I think this is getting way off topic into a debate on Western Medicine vs what I want to do.

Thank you

[taishon]

Here is a copy of the August issue of Energy Magazine published by the worldwide organization for Healing Touch, a form of Energy Healing accepted and practiced world wide, including in hospitals by doctors and nurses, for over 20 years. Of particular interest may be the section titled "Research" beginning on page 16.
https://www.healingtouchprogram.com/...august2010.pdf

Good article but not what I am trying to get at. In fact, this whole discussion seems to be centered on energy healing so I needs to make a post about that. I definitely believe that energy healing can relieve pain (in my opinion but providing the same modes as massage, meditation etc). I do NOT believe, at this point, that Energy Healing can significantly and directly do things like change cancer cell etc. The article above shows results in relieving pain not results that I am trying to test.

Thanx

[taishon]

Taishon,
I invite you to experience an energy session (no charge) in my studio. Consider it the first step in your investigative process.
Linda

First of all, I really appreciate this response and, at some point, I would like to take you up on it. However, unless you expect something miraculous to occur I think it may be counterproductive to what I want to do. Because I am looking at this as a skeptic, my beliefs will heavily bias my experience. At this point, no matter what you do, my beliefs will prejudice the experience and would not be fair to you (unless something truly miraculously happens). Let me be clear, I believe in alternative therapies..I just don't believe in some claims of alternative therapies. I will post something about his for the entire thread.

What my beliefs are unlikely to prejudice, is specific results in a controlled setting (the cancer cells in test tubes for example).

[taishon]

This thread has turned into a Western vs Eastern Medicine thread and I am very grateful to all the replies. I wanted to make a brief comment here.

I am far more interested in testing Palm Reading, Astrology, Psychics, and Dowsers/Dousers than I am Energy Healers. It may turn out that Energy Healing is NOT testable (or testing is not really useful) under the Scientific Method. A summary of claims;

1. Energy Healers claim that what they do manages pain and puts patients in a state of mind so that they heal better. There is no claim that healers are manipulating some kind of psychic energy that is beyond science or that the results are any different than other placebo therapies and holistic practices such as massage, meditation etc. This, I already believe (but I am too much of a skeptic for non-touch or non-physical therapies to work that well on me if its a placebo effect) and I am not interested in testing this (it would be like testing to see if yoga or massage therapy or meditation or musical therapy helps- they do). I applaud you for realizing the potential and limitations of your practice and I hope that you are doing it to genuinely help rather than just a selfish commercial motivation. I also hope that you are encouraging patients to also utilize the full palette of resources Western Medicine can offer.

2. Energy Healers claim that they are special conduits of psychic healing powers and that they do 'act a distance' to manipulate some kind of psychic energy. The results are far more dramatic than can be explained by moderate placebo effects and they do have dramatic and measurable effects on cancer cell counts and T-cell counts. This is measurable and testable. If you claim that you must have a human vessel to 'target' then it is still testable but way beyond what I am willing to try to set up (ie- I would have to commit a large amount of resources and time and work with doctors to get actual patient subjects etc)

Where are all the dousers/dowsers, Psychics, Astrologers, Palm Readers in this thread ?

[sonomawineandroses]

Thank you for your further clarity on your intentions. It seems a long way from your original assertion that we healers should be marketing ourselves as "entertainers" if we are to receive remuneration.

Much legitimate healing takes place in the realm between "no effect" and "complete remission".

Though I would never claim to be able cure anyone of anything, I always remain open to possibilities. Miracles can and DO happen.