Pendulum Healing/Reiki/Hypnosis

[TheTickingTime-Bomb]

So what you are saying is the NHS are wasting money and resources on an "antiquated concept" that clearly works for some people..Conventional medicine only works for some people,but is this justified because it has been clinically tested to produce hard data?I have seen TCM work first hand,what is your experience of it?Furthermore is UCLH wasting millions on alternative therapies..UCLH Internet - Our hospitals - Royal London Homoeopathic Hospital and The Gerson Institute - Alternative Cancer Treatment

Yes.

And your anecdotal evidence is meaningless.

[TheTickingTime-Bomb]

He uses the same arguments, that an absence of proof is a proof of absence. It's an infantile argument.

You seem to have misunderstood scientific theories. Absence of proof imlies improbability, not proof of absence; you can't prove a negative.

For example: Prove to me that Santa Claus doesn't exist.

All you can do is say the lack of suitable evidence implies his improbability.

I'm bored of this thread - come back nullmouse!

[Le Stu]

You seem to have misunderstood scientific theories. Absence of proof imlies improbability, not proof of absence; you can't prove a negative.

For example: Prove to me that Santa Claus doesn't exist.

All you can do is say the lack of suitable evidence implies his improbability.

I'm bored of this thread - come back nullmouse!

You're boring it.

"Acupuncture does have scientific value,but only as a placebo."

So, back that up. I agree, there's no way to prove that Santa Claus doesn't exist. That was my point!

[TheTickingTime-Bomb]

You're boring it.

"Acupuncture does have scientific value,but only as a placebo."

So, back that up. I agree, there's no way to prove that Santa Claus doesn't exist. That was my point!

I think you are confusing yourself.

When I mentioned the established fact that one cannot prove a negative, I was implying that the onus was on you to supply some meaningful evidence which shows us beyond reasonable doubt that we should take acupuncture seriously.

The placebo effect is well documented already, so I have good reason to believe that it is the basis of acupunctures alleged healing powers. If there is anything more than that, then it can be proved so. Unfortunately for your argument, it hasn't.

[Le Stu]

I think you are confusing yourself.

When I mentioned the established fact that one cannot prove a negative, I was implying that the onus was on you to supply some meaningful evidence which shows us beyond reasonable doubt that we should take it seriously.

The placebo effect is well documented already, so I have good reason to believe that it is the basis of acupunctures alleged healing powers. If there is anything more than that, then it can be proved so. Unfortunately for your argument, it hasn't.

So, you believe it's the placebo effect. There's no evidence that it is. Ta!

[TheTickingTime-Bomb]

So, you believe it's the placebo effect. There's no evidence that it is. Ta!

Sigh.

Are you being willfully awkward or do you really not understand?

Not that I have to prove the bleedin' obvious, but this is from the National Fibromyalgia Association.

In acupuncture studies, the placebo effect can be especially powerful, researchers note. In these studies, sham treatments involve needles that dont actually pierce the skin, or that are not placed in the correct places. Just the expectation among patient and doctor that the patient will get better makes the patient get better, Martin explains.

[Le Stu]

Sigh.

Are you being willfully awkward or do you really not understand?

Not that I have to prove the bleedin' obvious, but this is from the National Fibromyalgia Association.

In acupuncture studies, the placebo effect can be especially powerful, researchers note. In these studies, sham treatments involve needles that dont actually pierce the skin, or that are not placed in the correct places. Just the expectation among patient and doctor that the patient will get better makes the patient get better, Martin explains.

Martin explains. Awesome, dude. I can't tell you if TCM really works or not, but your reasoning ability is about as fucked as our banking sector.

[TheTickingTime-Bomb]

Martin explains. Awesome, dude. I can't tell you if TCM really works or not, but your reasoning ability is about as fucked as our banking sector.

That terse piece of language I recently relayed to you is called a quote. The concept is that it is a repeated phrase that adds emphasis to and develops a point or at least instigates some of your own research. The fact that you didn't bother to look for yourself to find out who Dr. David P. Martin (lead investigator on the Mayo Clinic study) actually was (even though I gave you the source) only serves to highlight your own reasoning ability.

As it happens Martin isn't altogether convinced that the placebo effect is the only thing that is involved in acupuncture so he could well be an ally of yours, but the reason I quoted him was to show that even in an unbiased academic study; The Placebo Effect is unarguably prominent.

[Guest droid]

quote

Yes.

And your anecdotal evidence is meaningless.

I'm not trying to provide any proof or evidence,i don't have to!You prove to me it doesn't work...YOU CAN'T!You still have not given me your experience and it seems you can not respect another point of view,and the fact it does work for some people....so as Duncan says"for those reasons i'm out"

[Alkaline]

I'm not trying to provide any proof or evidence,i don't have to!You prove to me it doesn't work...YOU CAN'T!You still have not given me your experience and it seems you can not respect another point of view,and the fact it does work for some people....so as Duncan says"for those reasons i'm out"

Are you happy to accept that it might just be a placebo effect for you? Have you been to a Doctor that has confirmed that your "problems" have gone away as a result of the treatment that you had?

I just personally don't think that there is enough quantifiable evidence to support the fact that it is beneficial. It may also be the case that it is beneficial to some but not to others. There are plenty of medical treatments that don't work for some but do for others.

Why was pinhead so angry?

[Guest droid]

Are you happy to accept that it might just be a placebo effect for you? Have you been to a Doctor that has confirmed that your "problems" have gone away as a result of the treatment that you had?

I just personally don't think that there is enough quantifiable evidence to support the fact that it is beneficial. It may also be the case that it is beneficial to some but not to others. There are plenty of medical treatments that don't work for some but do for others.

Why was pinhead so angry?

Phil i don't want to get into this with you...you know what happened the last time.I refer you to my previous posts .cheers

[Alkaline]

Phil i don't want to get into this with you...you know what happened the last time.I refer you to my previous posts .cheers

I'm asking a reasonable question. If you're saying to someone that they have to prove to you that it doesn't work but you've got nothing substantial to prove that it does it just strikes me as a little hypocritical that's all.

Open question to anyone really: Wouldn't sticking needles in your body result in an increase in adrenaline production giving you a more elated feeling and lessening the affects of any other "problems" that you were having at all? Could explain why people feel that that sort of thing works. *shrugs*

[Adam Easy Wishes]

I'm not trying to provide any proof or evidence,i don't have to!You prove to me it doesn't work...YOU CAN'T!You still have not given me your experience and it seems you can not respect another point of view,and the fact it does work for some people....so as Duncan says"for those reasons i'm out"

Are you happy to accept that it might just be a placebo effect for you? Have you been to a Doctor that has confirmed that your "problems" have gone away as a result of the treatment that you had?

I just personally don't think that there is enough quantifiable evidence to support the fact that it is beneficial. It may also be the case that it is beneficial to some but not to others. There are plenty of medical treatments that don't work for some but do for others.

8-)

[Guest droid]

Are you happy to accept that it might just be a placebo effect for you? Have you been to a Doctor that has confirmed that your "problems" have gone away as a result of the treatment that you had?

I just personally don't think that there is enough quantifiable evidence to support the fact that it is beneficial. It may also be the case that it is beneficial to some but not to others. There are plenty of medical treatments that don't work for some but do for others.

8-)

I'm happy to accept the possibility of that,my symptoms haven't gone away but have eased considerably since i started my treatment.My GP misdiagnosed the symptoms,which i found out after seeing a consultant for said problems.My wife is being treated for something entirely different which is almost cured,by the way the GP didn't have a clue what to diagnose her with.TCM is not just about acupuncture.I also said in a previous post that medical treatments work for some and not others.This particular treatment works for me,i'm happy with that.I have been treated and cured for other ailments with conventional medicine in the past.

[Alkaline]

Why are you still posting if you have nothing to contribute on the discussion?

Back on topic though, i'm on the fence really. I know plenty of people that have had accupuncture, cupping, tui na, massage therapy (shiatsu etc) and tons of people who swear by herbal medicines as well. I think it's nearly a 50/50 split between people who think they're beneficial and those who don't out of those people. I've had a shiatsu massage myself and yes i felt great directly after it, perfectly relaxed and less tense but the effect didn't last particularly long.

I actually did a course in massage therapies in Australia with a few of my mates. It was something we decided to do as a laugh initially but it worked wonders after a hard day shinning up and down 11ft ladders and swinging about in trees. It was quite homoerotic though It was an interesting experience though.

In the end i guess if it works for a particular person, even as a placebo, and makes them feel better then it can only be a good thing. It's more its use as a flat out "cure" than as a therapy that can help aid ailments/conditions that i object to and i think that a lot of people who can be easily persuaded or a touch on the hypochondriac side might go into it expecting more than it can generally deliver.

[nullmouse]

I've had a brief look through the last few pages, and I think there's a few issues floating around (hurrah for comedic understatement). There seems to be some misconceptions about the nature of scientific evidence (absence of proof does not mean absence of research, for example) and some discussion on whether a treatment being a placebo or not really matters. Luckily, Sense About Science have produced a really, really nice little brochure precisely about these issues and it's applicable to not just alternative therapies but any treatment.

You can read it here: http://www.senseaboutscience.org.uk/pdf/I've%20got%20nothing%20to%20lose%20by%20trying%20it%20FINAL.pdf

It explains in nice detail how we gather data for evidence based medicine, addresses the issue of whether doing something is better than nothing and also provides some really good links for those of you passionate about the direction this thread has taken.

[nullmouse]

Open question to anyone really: Wouldn't sticking needles in your body result in an increase in adrenaline production giving you a more elated feeling and lessening the affects of any other "problems" that you were having at all? Could explain why people feel that that sort of thing works. *shrugs*

There are alternative theories for how acupuncture may work, that don't rely on the antiquated view of meridians and qi flow. One of which is known as the "gate control" theory of pain, which suggests that acupuncture may overload the body's ability to deal with pain and shuts the 'gate' that controls it. It's similar to your suggestion, in that it could be a physiological mechanism of action, but it's not proven. Again, we could test this hypothesis by using needles that don't penetrate the skin: Fake needles that apply pressure that feels like being pierced, but actually just retract into a sheath that sticks to the surface of the skin have been developed. If penetration (fnar) is required, then these fake needles should have no effect or the real needles should do substantially better.

(Except, of course, there'd be no way of preventing the acupunturist from knowing if they had real of fake needles - it would be obvious they had fake needles, so they could consciously or subconsciously effect the results. Gah, these things are called "confounding factors" and they're a pain to control for.)

[Alkaline]

There are alternative theories for how acupuncture may work, that don't rely on the antiquated view of meridians and qi flow. One of which is known as the "gate control" theory of pain, which suggests that acupuncture may overload the body's ability to deal with pain and shuts the 'gate' that controls it. It's similar to your suggestion, in that it could be a physiological mechanism of action, but it's not proven. Again, we could test this hypothesis by using needles that don't penetrate the skin: Fake needles that apply pressure that feels like being pierced, but actually just retract into a sheath that sticks to the surface of the skin have been developed. If penetration (fnar) is required, then these fake needles should have no effect or the real needles should do substantially better.

(Except, of course, there'd be no way of preventing the acupunturist from knowing if they had real of fake needles - it would be obvious they had fake needles, so they could consciously or subconsciously effect the results. Gah, these things are called "confounding factors" and they're a pain to control for.)

That's the sort of thing i was driving at to be honest. Cheers.

[Shub]

Heh, thought I'd jump in here and offer an alternate view

Medical science right now will be viewed as barbaric in a couple of hundred years time as drilling holes in the skull was during medieval times, basically we cut parts out and zap tumours with a bit of radiation. It's still basically the same butchery that went on in those times, just refined with a better understanding of how, but as destructive.

What is known, as proven though placebo AND other means is that the human mind is more powerful than the medicine in a lot of ways, you genuinely believe you are gonna get through cancer, have a supportive environement, the chances are, you will pull through, you give up, get depressed, you're gonna die.

BUT, lets get into the more out there thoughts, I've said nothing new to any of you probably. Let's really get into the human psyche. Ever heard of the hallucinogen Ibogaine? It's trips take people on a road to self healing, and you know what, it's being tested out in London right now, by medical doctors to cure addiction in heroin addicts, it's a powerful trip and it shows you to yourself. After one trip many are reported never to touch heroin/coke/tobacco again. Just google "ibogaine treatment" and you'll find many many sites.

So, how is this in any way different to the shaman in the jungle drinking his ayahausca? Is it at all?

[nullmouse]

Medical science right now will be viewed as barbaric in a couple of hundred years time as drilling holes in the skull was during medieval times, basically we cut parts out and zap tumours with a bit of radiation. It's still basically the same butchery that went on in those times, just refined with a better understanding of how, but as destructive.

What is known, as proven though placebo AND other means is that the human mind is more powerful than the medicine in a lot of ways, you genuinely believe you are gonna get through cancer, have a supportive environement, the chances are, you will pull through, you give up, get depressed, you're gonna die.

I'm sure it's not the way you intended this to read, but part of what you've said here is potentially very misleading. First, I'll agree that the current methods for treating cancer are fairly nasty, but it's a nasty disease that has a nasty pathology that can, in most tumours, recurr and spread with ease - It's also a disease that carries a substantial risk of death. Part of my research interests include ways to prevent people from developing cancer to reduce the number of people that have to face the unpleasant reality of chemotherapy/radiotherapy/surgery.

However, and you'll understand why I need to be clear on this, these therapies are used because they are effective and proven to be so. Just having a happy disposition will not cure someone of cancer and, although I'm sure it's not what you meant to say, the suggestion that someone can dispense with proven medical treatments and survive could be fatal advice.

BUT, lets get into the more out there thoughts, I've said nothing new to any of you probably. Let's really get into the human psyche. Ever heard of the hallucinogen Ibogaine? It's trips take people on a road to self healing, and you know what, it's being tested out in London right now, by medical doctors to cure addiction in heroin addicts, it's a powerful trip and it shows you to yourself. After one trip many are reported never to touch heroin/coke/tobacco again. Just google "ibogaine treatment" and you'll find many many sites.

So, how is this in any way different to the shaman in the jungle drinking his ayahausca? Is it at all?

I'm not familiar with the literature on this drug with regards to its effectiveness, but irregardless there's nothing to say that a medical cure can't be found from nature and used as an effective treatment: The difference between the drug ibogaine and the shaman's ayahausca would be the purity and regulated potency of the drug. Many modern medicines (including some of the vinca alkaloids used in cancer chemotherapy) are based on naturally occurring compounds that have been purified and often chemically modified to make them more effective.

Like any medicine, the claims that ibogaine can help people recover from addiction can be tested - But in this case there would be many, many confounding factors and limitations to do so. For example, how could you design a placebo control for a study using a psychoactive agent? Or how could you prove you weren't subtituting one person's addiction for another? How could you prove that any benefits were due to a self-awareness trip and not some other pharmacological effect of the drug?

The idea of using a potent hallucinogen as a therapy for addiction seems counter-intuitive, and would probably create another set of problems such as drug-drug interactions, dependency, mental health concerns and so forth. Maybe there is call for drastic measures in drastic situations (a psychological analogy to the butchery of cancer therapy, perhaps?), but I would personally expect to see a large volume of realiable, well-performed research to back that up. How feasible that is given some of the factors above is a matter for debate.

[DJ Jo-D]

I went for a tarot card & reading at the weekend (present for my birthday) I went in sceptical and tried not to give anything away but I have to say that 90% of it was far to familiar to be a guess! spooky!