Ran across those newsgroup comments to John Knapp from 11 years ago and used Roger Nelson's response to justify modifying the widipedia mention of the German study on TM that he likes to quote on his website. Everyone claims that TMers and MUM faculty are dishonest, but there's a reason why Judy coined the phrase "Honest John" to refer to John Knapp. Note that he STILL hasn't changed what he says about the German study despite being spanked severely in public by Roger over the trancenet entry on it:
== evalutation of german study == I reworded the line about the German government study to reflect what was actually going on. The german government interviewed 27 people who had complaints about TM and (surprise!) more than 75% of them reported adverse effects from TM. Here's a couple of newsgroup comments by Roger D Nelson of [http://en.wikipedia.org/ wiki/Princeton_Engineering_Anomalies_Research_Lab#Emeritus_members PEAR], who read the study and gave an informal review of it in the sci.skeptics newsgroup just over 11 years ago, wearing the hat of someone who had performed a comprehensive review of the scientific literature on meditation for the NIH. Note that he was talking to John Knapp, whose website was the source for the Skeptic Dictionary entry and that John still hasn't changed his website to reflect their conversation 11 years ago: :[...] :"I not only have read the study, and commented on it subsequently in posts that you apparently have not taken the opportunity to read, I am competent to do so, both by professional training and by experience. The latter includes having reviewed, comprehensively, the scientific literature on meditation, including Trancendental Meditation, for the Office of Alternative Medicine, NIH. The German "study" is not scientific by any reasonable standard, particularly including that of peer review. Had it been available at the time of my review, I would have listed it as a report of negative results. While the study would have merited little attention, I probably would have noted that its sampling procedures and analytic approaches permit no generalization, and I would have indicated that selective reporting occurs, apparently for the specific purpose of providing descriptive anecdotes to therapists. The general conclusions drawn by the study authors are not supportable. " [http://groups.google.com/group/sci.psychology.misc/msg/2a2cc1b928f68a1f\ ?hl=en&] ;[...] :"No, John, I am a greybeard, with a 1972 doctorate in in experimental psychology concentrating on perception, neurophysiology, and cognitive capacities. Of course that includes an excellent classical education in experimental design and statistics. It was, however, my 15 years of experience at Princeton, developing sound research and analytical strategies for the study of anomalies linking consciousness and physical systems that prompted an invitation to participate in the OAM effort to determine what research had been done in its purview, and to attempt a first resolution of the implications thereof, in order to design a useful program of prospective research in alternative medicine. :"I have already posted the relevant information from the resulting review of meditation that bears on an assessment of the merits of the German study. That study is not what you claim and imply it to be, namely a reliable ("prestigious" is a term you have used) source for the generalizations that you specifically make to the effect that trancendental meditation is harmful. At best it is what it was designed to be, namely a recounting of problems suffered by parents, spouses, and a small number -- 27 as I recall -- of meditators. I have no investment in TM, but I do have a strong interest in proper reporting and wise use of science and its authority. To attempt to generalize from a study conducted as this one was, by asking each troubled person to please put us in touch with other similarly troubled people, with implications that meditation, or even TM , is dangerous or harmful, is ludicrous on the face of it." [http://groups.google.com/group/sci.psychology.misc/msg/b0cd8d009bcb5512?\ dmode=source&hl=en] Roger D. Nelson, Princeton Engineering Anomalies Research (PEAR) C-131 E-Quad, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544 voice: 609 258-5370 fax: 609 258-1993 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.princeton.edu/~rdnelson/index.html <small>The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[User:Sparaig|Sparaig]] ([[User talk:Sparaig|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/ Sparaig|contribs]]) 13:20, 25 January 2007 (UTC).</small><!-- HagermanBot Auto- Unsigned -->
