Jim, I know a bit about hypnosis, given that what in part what my dissertation was involved with. In terms of pain control and attention, there is something more than a placebo response. That has been amply demonstrated in terms of pain control.
In terms of the so called healing touch, there has not, as far as I've seen a double blind study that has shown anything beyond an expectational set - in other words what the participants thought what would occur and what the experimenters have occured. The only study I've know that's looked at that showed that it was no more effective than a control group. Moreover, there has been no real-simulator designs attempted. Real simulator designs use a group of participants that are trained to fake a response. If a naive group of rater cannot discrimate between those who are faking and the experimental group, then any effects found are most likey due to non experimental effects, like those trying to please the experimenter (good subject effects) etc. my own opinion is that the experimental data is so sloppy that any real effect, if any (and probably not) is lost in the bull sh*t noise. larry On 7/16/05, Jim Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Dana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2005 12:29 PM > > To: CF-Community > > Subject: Re: Prayers do not influence recovery from heart > > cathereterization > > > > what's clinically significant to you? Personally, 65% more likely to > > be alive would look pretty good to me ... > > > > http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=healthNews&storyID=2 > > 005-07-15T172140Z_01_B232717_RTRIDST_0_HEALTH-HEALING-TOUCH-DC.XML > > I think in this case the meaning is that the effects are probably from side > effects of the therapy (placebo effect, relaxation, etc) and not specific to > the therapy itself. > > Many "therapies" (therapeutic touch, hypnotism, massage, acupuncture, > reflexology and many others) have similar effects when tested. Do all of > these (each with a completely different practitioner explanation of their > effectiveness) do the same things in completely ways? Or do each tap into > some common source of benefit (such as the placebo effect)? > > In any case I think that's what's meant by "statistically significant but > not clinically significant". > > Jim Davis > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support efficiency by 100% http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:165013 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
