Indisputable Evidence for Mind over Matter

[Rolci]

Hey Rolci, I found those above vids by ONE simple search. Dont you think it would save future long-winded posts if you just do a little search.... before believing everything? Just a suggestion of course, could save you a lot of typing, and backlash

I don't follow your logic. So if I do a video where you see a plane in the sky, and then show you that it was a holographic projection I was creating to fool you, does that mean that all planes are holographic projections?

It is time for you to learn what a peer reviewed article is? Here are hints that can be used. Look for an abstract. All of the articles I checked from you lacked an abstract, discussion, review, conclusion. None of the articles discussed the statistical methods used, or the confidence intervals of the results.

so you wanted something like this?

http://www.nature.com/ajg/journal/v97/n4/abs/ajg2002234a.html

It has abstract, objectives, methods, results, conclusion, the rest in the body of the research itself.

Conclusion: This study clearly demonstrates that hypnotherapy remains an extremely effective treatment for irritable bowel syndrome and should prove more cost-effective as new, more expensive drugs come on to the market.

http://www.nature.com/ijo/journal/v22/n3/abs/0800578a.html

CONCLUSIONS: This controlled trial on the use of hypnotherapy, as an adjunct to dietary advice in producing weight loss, has produced a statistically significant result in favour of hypnotherapy.

http://www.nature.com/ajg/journal/v107/n4/full/ajg2011487a.html

CONCLUSIONS: The beneficial effects of gut-directed HT are long lasting in children with *** or IBS with two thirds still in remission almost 5 years after treatment, making it a highly valuable therapeutic option.

http://www.nature.com/pr/journal/v45/n4-2/full/pr1999209a.html

"This preliminary data indicates that Acupuncture and Hypnotherapy are well accepted by the pediatric chronic pain population and it appears that acupuncture and hypnotherapy efficacy studies with this population would be feasible."

http://www.nature.com/nrgastro/journal/v3/n12/full/ncpgasthep0643.html

Do you need me to go on and on and on? Quite frankly, no amount of studies seems to be evidence enough for you. Yet you seem to be against persoonal experience as a possible avenue to personal conviction. You must realize there's nothing left between the two. Guess there are those that don't WANT TO believe what countless studies have CLEARLY indicated.

If you're were really so desperate for evidence before application (pointless, you spend more time looking for it then what you would lose if you tried the methods and they didn't work!!) then, instead of scouting forums like this, you would attend event like this:

https://www.rsm.ac.uk/events/hye04

This meeting aims to:

� To introduce the general public and other interested parties in the use of hypnosis for dental work.

� Present innovative strategies for using hypnosis with post traumatic stress disorder.

� To define / discuss loss of life, of immortality, of physical integrity, of death of a meaningful other and of end of life; and to give brief case histories where hypnosis was used in the context of each example and quantify what part hypnosis played.

� To inform and present clinical evidence in the use of hypnosis in cancer care.

� To draw attention to the benefits of incorporating hypnotherapy in oncology.

� To demonstrate the interplay between mindfulness and hypnosis in some psychiatric disorders.

� To present clinical evidence in the use of hypnosis in chronic pain.

Your suggestion that your position is akin to the flat-earthers is justifiable. Pretending that the actions of dubious and asinine claims such as flat-earthers makes your position better is simply laughable. You are the flat-earther and it shows. You make grandiose and inane claims. You can't support those claims. The evidence against is overwhelming.

In case you didn't know, flat-earthers (like you) make it their business to IGNORE all evidence for something (in their case the "roundness" of the Earth). I have provided you with COUNTLESS sources now, from Nature, ScienceDaily, Journal of Clinical Oncology, National Center for Biotechnology Information, the American Journal of Gastroenterology, etc.

Go on then, ignore all the evidence, you flat-earther. Keep telling yourself hypnotherapy does NOTHING AT ALL.

Edited September 18, 2014 by Rolci

[seeder]

As for what you called my "1951 story", let's have a better look at it, because I can see you haven't done the research (again), just looked at a number and made a judgement. (Hardly the way scientific enquiry works.)

In February of 1951, Dr. Albert Mason began treating a teenage patient whose skin was so ravaged that after two unsuccessful skin grafts, his plastic surgeons agreed they could do nothing else to help him.

Why Did Albert mason abandon hypnosis? Researcher?

[stereologist]

BTW, if you are going to copy something you need to show the place where you copied the text. You posted that idiotic 1951 story and you copied and pasted that text. That was obvious to me and it is obvious to everyone that you broke the rules of copyright in doing that.

The reason you did not provide more details is that your fairy tale story has no more details than you describe. Yet, you fell for this fairy tale hook, line, and sinker.

So here is where you stole that text, or possibly you stole that text from another place without providing a source.

http://whitecrowbooks.com/books/page/if_this_be_magic_the_forgotten_power_of_hypnosis/

You have committed plagiarism. If a real scientist did that they would be brought up to an ethics panel for review. Real scientists work in the real world.

The book follows up on the work of Mesmer. Did you know that Mesmer was shown to be wrong and that his mesmerism did not work by a panel that included Benjamin Franklin? I fyou want a quick overview of Mesmer, his secret societies and his sudden downfall read this abstract:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2588895/

I found another site which of course is misleading in the case of Mesmer.

http://thehypnotherapyworks.com/the-history-of-hypnotherapy/

In fact, the French government, led by Marie Antoinette, stated Mesmer a fraud.

Why do frauds leave out the fact that Mesmer was proved to be wrong? Mesmer made claims. The claims were tested and everything Mesmer claimed were shown to be false. There was no hand waving dismissal as this sentence might suggest to some. Mesmer was tested. The evidence was clear and indisputable. Mesmer's claims were false.

So going back to the story which you copied without giving credit to others. The clues are found in the article which states that the results were published in 1952 in the BMJ. A check reveals that to be the case. What the book does not mention is that this case study report was highly disputed at the time.

The disease by the way is ichthyosis. It is a genetic disease. There is also a non-genetic disease called ichthyosis acquisita.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ichthyosis

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ichthyosis_acquisita

The dispute at the time was whether or not the disease the patient had was due to an allergic reaction or not. Furthermore, Freeman points out to Mason that the experience of the allergen clinic is that an attack can be brought on through the attitude of the patient. In other words, Mason did not cure the patient, but simply prevented further onset of the disease. The claims of a miraculous cure are simply wrong. That is typical of the woo crowd that want to misinform people about events.

The patient was diagnosed with the following. Notice that the name has changed over time.

http://rarediseases.info.nih.gov/gard/1039/bullous-erythroderma-ichthyosiformis-congenita-of-brocq/resources/1

What we see is that the case is not as clear as the woo source would like to suggest. Medicine is always part art. The "miraculous cure" never happened. What is missing in this story is the long term outcome of the patient. That is the important follow up performed in tests.

[stereologist]

As for what you called my "1951 story", let's have a better look at it, because I can see you haven't done the research (again), just looked at a number and made a judgement. (Hardly the way scientific enquiry works.)

<snip>

You can read the whole account and many more in 'If This be Magic: The Forgotten Power of Hypnosis' by Guy Lyon Playfair.

To see how hypnotherapy works, explained by a Thomas Yarnell, Ph.D., Licensed Clinical Psychologist and Hypnosis Specialist, Chief Psychologist at The Counseling Center, member of the International Society for Mental Health Online:

http://hypnosisandu.homestead.com/

More uses of hypnotherapy, with references:

Twelve controlled studies have demonstrated that hypnosis is a superior way to reduce migraine attacks in children and teenagers. In one experiment, schoolchildren were randomly assigned a placebo or propranolol, a blood-pressure lowering agent, or taught self-hypnosis; only the children using self-hypnosis had a significant drop in severity and frequency of headaches (Olness et al., 1989). Another pain study of patients who were chronically ill reports a 113-percent increase in pain tolerance among highly hypnotizable subjects versus a control group who did not receive hypnosis (Debenedittis et al., 1989). • Dentistry. Some people have learned how to tolerate dental work with hypnotherapy as the only anesthetic. Even when an anesthetic is used, hypnotherapy can also be employed to reduce fear and anxiety, control bleeding and salivation, and reduce postoperative discomfort. • Pregnancy and delivery. Women who have hypnosis prior to delivery have shorter labors and more comfortable deliveries. Women have also used self-hypnosis to control pain during delivery (Rossi, 1986). • Anxiety. Hypnosis can be used to establish a new reaction to specific anxiety-causing activities such as stage fright, plane flights, and other phobias. • Immune system function. Hypnotherapy can have a positive effect on the immune system. One study has shown that hypnosis can raise immunoglobulin levels of healthy children (Olness et al., 1989). Another study reported that self-hypnosis led to an increase in white blood cell activity (Hall, 1982-83). Other studies in the past 40 years have shown that hypnosis can affect a wide variety of physical responses, including reduction of bleeding in hemophiliacs (Lucas, 1965), reduction in severity of attacks of hay fever and asthma (Mason and Black, 1958), increased breast size (Honiotest, 1977; LeCron, 1969; Staib and Logan, 1977; Willard, 1977; Williams, 1973), the cure of warts (Ahser, 1956; Sinclair-Geiben and Chalmers, 1959; Surman et al., 1973; Ullman and Dudek, 1960), the production of skin blisters and bruises (Bellis, 1966; Johnson and Barber, 1976), and control of reaction to allergens such as poison ivy and certain foods (Ikemi, 1967; Ikemi and Nakagawa, 1962; Platonov, 1959).~No one knows exactly how such bodily changes are brought about by hypnosis, but they clearly occur because of the connections between mind and body. It is also clear that suggestions have the capacity to affect all systems and organs of the body in a variety of ways.

Source: http://www.lifefirst...py_hypnosis.htm

If interested, there are a zillion tons of free resources available for hypnotherapy on the internet. For general info the best resource I believe is Guy Lyon Playfair's book I mentioned above, I can email it to anyone interested.

Yes I did research. You posted material which was not your own. That is plagiarism. You just did it again by copying material without reference as to the source. That is dishonest. The reason I was able to do research is that I found where you stole the text.

http://www.radiolab.org/story/299045-hypnotist-and-warts/

You stole the belief system right down to the parentheses from here:

http://www.alessiakernot.com/hypnotic-intervention-in-the-psychological-and-hence-physiologicalregeneration-of-amputated-tissue.html

What you have done would get you brought up to an ethics review board if you were at a university or a researcher.

So you go from a disputed case to migraines? Let's see hypnosis and how it deals with cancer. Let's see hypnosis being applied to something tough to deal with instead of migraines.

[SSilhouette]

BTW, if you are going to copy something you need to show the place where you copied the text. You posted that idiotic 1951 story and you copied and pasted that text. That was obvious to me and it is obvious to everyone that you broke the rules of copyright in doing that.

The reason you did not provide more details is that your fairy tale story has no more details than you describe. Yet, you fell for this fairy tale hook, line, and sinker.

So here is where you stole that text, or possibly you stole that text from another place without providing a source.

http://whitecrowbook...er_of_hypnosis/

You have committed plagiarism. If a real scientist did that they would be brought up to an ethics panel for review. Real scientists work in the real world.

The book follows up on the work of Mesmer. Did you know that Mesmer was shown to be wrong and that his mesmerism did not work by a panel that included Benjamin Franklin? I fyou want a quick overview of Mesmer, his secret societies and his sudden downfall read this abstract:

http://www.ncbi.nlm....les/PMC2588895/

I found another site which of course is misleading in the case of Mesmer.

http://thehypnothera...f-hypnotherapy/

Why do frauds leave out the fact that Mesmer was proved to be wrong? Mesmer made claims. The claims were tested and everything Mesmer claimed were shown to be false. There was no hand waving dismissal as this sentence might suggest to some. Mesmer was tested. The evidence was clear and indisputable. Mesmer's claims were false.

So going back to the story which you copied without giving credit to others. The clues are found in the article which states that the results were published in 1952 in the BMJ. A check reveals that to be the case. What the book does not mention is that this case study report was highly disputed at the time.

The disease by the way is ichthyosis. It is a genetic disease. There is also a non-genetic disease called ichthyosis acquisita.

http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Ichthyosis

http://en.wikipedia....yosis_acquisita

The dispute at the time was whether or not the disease the patient had was due to an allergic reaction or not. Furthermore, Freeman points out to Mason that the experience of the allergen clinic is that an attack can be brought on through the attitude of the patient. In other words, Mason did not cure the patient, but simply prevented further onset of the disease. The claims of a miraculous cure are simply wrong. That is typical of the woo crowd that want to misinform people about events.

The patient was diagnosed with the following. Notice that the name has changed over time.

http://rarediseases....ocq/resources/1

What we see is that the case is not as clear as the woo source would like to suggest. Medicine is always part art. The "miraculous cure" never happened. What is missing in this story is the long term outcome of the patient. That is the important follow up performed in tests.

The long term outcome for any patient is death.

Remission of disease is a condition we are all in, in one way or another. Why disparage remission, even if induced by placebo, hypnosis or just plain old positive thinking? If it lengthens life of anyone for any period of time who would have met their ultimate end sooner, it is an acceptable medical practice.

End of discussion.

Edited September 18, 2014 by SSilhouette

[stereologist]

I don't follow your logic. So if I do a video where you see a plane in the sky, and then show you that it was a holographic projection I was creating to fool you, does that mean that all planes are holographic projections?

so you wanted something like this?

http://www.nature.co...jg2002234a.html

It has abstract, objectives, methods, results, conclusion, the rest in the body of the research itself.

Conclusion: This study clearly demonstrates that hypnotherapy remains an extremely effective treatment for irritable bowel syndrome and should prove more cost-effective as new, more expensive drugs come on to the market.

http://www.nature.co...s/0800578a.html

CONCLUSIONS: This controlled trial on the use of hypnotherapy, as an adjunct to dietary advice in producing weight loss, has produced a statistically significant result in favour of hypnotherapy.

http://www.nature.co...jg2011487a.html

CONCLUSIONS: The beneficial effects of gut-directed HT are long lasting in children with *** or IBS with two thirds still in remission almost 5 years after treatment, making it a highly valuable therapeutic option.

http://www.nature.co...pr1999209a.html

"This preliminary data indicates that Acupuncture and Hypnotherapy are well accepted by the pediatric chronic pain population and it appears that acupuncture and hypnotherapy efficacy studies with this population would be feasible."

http://www.nature.co...asthep0643.html

Do you need me to go on and on and on? Quite frankly, no amount of studies seems to be evidence enough for you. Yet you seem to be against persoonal experience as a possible avenue to personal conviction. You must realize there's nothing left between the two. Guess there are those that don't WANT TO believe what countless studies have CLEARLY indicated.

If you're were really so desperate for evidence before application (pointless, you spend more time looking for it then what you would lose if you tried the methods and they didn't work!!) then, instead of scouting forums like this, you would attend event like this:

https://www.rsm.ac.uk/events/hye04

This meeting aims to:

<skip>

In case you didn't know, flat-earthers (like you) make it their business to IGNORE all evidence for something (in their case the "roundness" of the Earth). I have provided you with COUNTLESS sources now, from Nature, ScienceDaily, Journal of Clinical Oncology, National Center for Biotechnology Information, the American Journal of Gastroenterology, etc.

Go on then, ignore all the evidence, you flat-earther. Keep telling yourself hypnotherapy does NOTHING AT ALL.

Very good you were able to locate a peer reviewed article. Do you understand the difference between the chaff you have been tossing out and the peer reviewed article? It is certainly unclear if you do.

So you choose an article about a disease which is ameliorated by hypnosis, but not cured. Do you have anything to do with your favorite issue cancer? let's see how well hypnosis does with cancer. What you should understand is that some of the baloney you spew is being tested. Right there is evidence that hypnosis is being used for things like migraines. It is not being used to cure diseases such as cancer. That is due to the limitations of the method.

Your problem is clearly the ability to reason without copying and regurgitating what some woo site claims. Clearly, hypnosis has its value. I am well aware of its application, but the woos take a minor success and pretend it has greater application. If so please show us the studies. You yourself are clear evidence why as you call it "persoonal[sic] experience" is wrong. Learn why tests are blinded. They prevent the personal experience from tainting the tests.

So if I went to the meeting I would learn the limitations of hypnosis and how it cannot directly address diseases directly but soothes the patients so that they can make it through the treatments real medicine will deliver.

You should know that flat-earthers make things up due to their failed position which is exactly what the woo does. They see hypnosis used to treat vague symptoms such as tiredness, discomfort, and such make up fantasies that it is more than it is.

Please do not tell a lie that I ever stated that "Keep telling yourself hypnotherapy does NOTHING AT ALL." That is a foolish statement. What I do state is that baloney claims made by the adherents are baloney. These alternative methods are relegated to dealing with patient attitude and only support the main treatment of the condition. Hypnosis does not cure the diseases. Only a flat-earther like you makes grandiose statements about these baloney ideas.

[stereologist]

The long term outcome for any patient is death.

Remission of disease is a condition we are all in, in one way or another. Why disparage remission, even if induced by placebo, hypnosis or just plain old positive thinking? If it lengthens life of anyone for any period of time who would have met their ultimate end sooner, it is an acceptable medical practice.

End of discussion.

Where is the evidence that the patient went into remission? Where is the follow up on subsequent outbreaks? Where is the evidence that the hypnosis actually had an effect? Maybe the patient state would have changed without the hypnosis. That is why testing is done. It is used to establish the efficacy of a treatment.

There are many diseases which can be cured. Hypnosis, strong belief, and such will not cure diseases. They have no effect on pathogens or poisons.

[Saru]

As a general note - if you are quoting material from an external source please remember to do the following:

1. Always include a source link
   
2. Place the quoted content in quote tags to differentiate it from your own words
   
3. Only quote a small amount - do not copy and paste large amounts of text
   

If you mix quoted text with your own words without source links or quote tags it is extremely difficult to tell where your comments end and the quoted text begins.

Thank you.

[stereologist]

Rolci there are many treatments which are no longer used. If we go back in time we can find those treatments which were based on untested ideas such as humours.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/276301/humour

These humours were the "personal experience" of the day. They were believed in, but not shown to exist. Treatments were based on this nonexistent concept.

You posted a case study of a disease. Medicine no longer uses case studies, because it is now known that they are not useful. Clinical studies are performed with many patients because it is well known that different people react differently to the same treatments. The biological diversity in humans is astounding. A great example is nephrons in the human kidney. People can have from 150,000 to 1.2 million nephrons. That is a 9X difference.

[Rolci]

"Dr. Albert Mason began treating a teenage patient whose skin was so ravaged that after two unsuccessful skin grafts, his plastic surgeons agreed they could do nothing else to help him. ... So he decided to start with the boy's left arm (he specified one body part at a time in order to isolate a direct cause and effect from hypnosis). The arm cleared up in under two weeks."

Re-quoted from source mentioned above.

Of course, in your eyes this was no indication of anything whatsoever. On another note, I notice now you admit hypnotherapy works. Make no mistake, it's not only migraine we're talking about. According to the British Medical Journal, we're talking about

-cancer related anxiety, pain, nausea, and vomiting, [side effects of chemotherapy]

-insomnia, phobias, obesity, anxiety, both acute and chronic pain, asthma and irritable bowel syndrome.

And that is just one source. I love the way Nature expresses a standpoint which is ignored by the medical profession to this very day, and they keep using drugs instead.

"... hypnotherapy remains an extremely effective treatment for irritable bowel syndrome and should prove more cost-effective as new, more expensive drugs come on to the market."

http://www.nature.com/ajg/journal/v97/n4/abs/ajg2002234a.html

Cost-effective sounds good to me, especially in light of the quote I mentioned earlier:

"The analgesic drug market in the US alone amounts to over $2.3 billion annually for pharmaceutical companies like Proctor & Gamble, and that’s just for over-the-counter drugs. Simply practicing meditation could eliminate the need for expensive and side effect-causing medication that can ruin the body’s natural immune response."

http://naturalsociety.com/gene-expression-changes-meditation/

Do you know what's common in hypnotherapy and the placebo effect? The way they work is that they influence the subconscious mind. Can you think of any other methods that are working on the same mechanism? Just a clue: (It's the ones you keep debating, screaming for evidence.)

That reminds me, since I've asked you like 10 times now but you keep dodging the answer, I'll ask you again after summarizing the following facts:

1. The placebo effect is real. Can be used in pain management, instead of expensive side effect-inducing drugs.

2. Humans can consciously control their autonomic nervous system as well as their immune system. Can be used in treating and preventing flu and other viral infections http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/05/140505155210.htm

3. Hypnotherapy successfully has been proven to be effective in treating: cancer related anxiety, pain, nausea, and vomiting, [side effects of chemotherapy], insomnia, phobias, obesity, anxiety, both acute and chronic pain, asthma and in irritable bowel syndrome.

Now what I want to know is if you're using or have ever used any of these proven methods in treatment or prevention. Do you use placebos? Do you use (self-)hypnosis? Do you meditate?

What do you need the evidence for exactly? So when a new treatment method is confirmed, do you start using it? In spite of the fact that before there was SUFFICIENT (decided arbitrarily) evidence you did not even give it a try. Do you completely reject the validity of personal experience, and give away all your authority to institutions and journals, and how can you justify avoiding alternative treatments when conventional medicine has given upon you and told you how long you have left to live? What's your problem with this topic trying to raise awareness of POSSIBLE (but as yet not sufficiently proven) tools available? Why do you attack simple information presented, with examples used to illustrate? Why do you keep asking for the kind of evidence you know doesn't exist (yet), mostly due to lack of appropriate research? The sources I have so far provided will satisfy 99% of the population. Yes, you're welcome to call them gullible. Millions have seen their lives embettered and sometimes even saved due to awareness of these alternative approaches. They don't mind you calling them gullible, as long as they're happy and alive. As for you, I have no further evidence to satisfy your special needs. I invite you to consider ALL the claims I quoted in this topic unsubstantiated. Stop asking for more evidence. I have none for you. Hope your restraint from utilizing free tools that work well for others will serve you well in life. It's been a pleasure.

Edited September 18, 2014 by Rolci

[stereologist]

<ship>

http://www.nature.co...jg2002234a.html

"The analgesic drug market in the US alone amounts to over $2.3 billion annually for pharmaceutical companies like Proctor & Gamble, and that’s just for over-the-counter drugs. Simply practicing meditation could eliminate the need for expensive and side effect-causing medication that can ruin the body’s natural immune response."

Do you know what's common in hypnotherapy and the placebo effect? The way they work is that they influence the subconscious mind. Can you think of any other methods that are working on the same mechanism? Just a clue: (It's the ones you keep debating, screaming for evidence.)

That reminds me, since I've asked you like 10 times now but you keep dodging the answer, I'll ask you again after summarizing the following facts:

1. The placebo effect is real. Can be used in pain management, instead of expensive side effect-inducing drugs.

2. Humans can consciously control their autonomic nervous system as well as their immune system. Can be used in treating and preventing flu and other viral infections http://www.scienceda...40505155210.htm

3. Hypnotherapy successfully has been proven to be effective in treating: cancer related anxiety, pain, nausea, and vomiting, [side effects of chemotherapy], insomnia, phobias, obesity, anxiety, both acute and chronic pain, asthma and in irritable bowel syndrome.

Now what I want to know is if you're using or have ever used any of these proven methods in treatment or prevention. Do you use placebos? Do you use (self-)hypnosis? Do you meditate?

What do you need the evidence for exactly? So when a new treatment method is confirmed, do you start using it? In spite of the fact that before there was SUFFICIENT (decided arbitrarily) evidence you did not even give it a try. Do you completely reject the validity of personal experience, and give away all your authority to institutions and journals, and how can you justify avoiding alternative treatments when conventional medicine has given upon you and told you how long you have left to live? What's your problem with this topic trying to raise awareness of POSSIBLE (but as yet not sufficiently proven) tools available? Why do you attack simple information presented, with examples used to illustrate? Why do you keep asking for the kind of evidence you know doesn't exist (yet), mostly due to lack of appropriate research? The sources I have so far provided will satisfy 99% of the population. Yes, you're welcome to call them gullible. Millions have seen their lives embettered and sometimes even saved due to awareness of these alternative approaches. They don't mind you calling them gullible, as long as they're happy and alive. As for you, I have no further evidence to satisfy your special needs. I invite you to consider ALL the claims I quoted in this topic unsubstantiated. Stop asking for more evidence. I have none for you. Hope your restraint from utilizing free tools that work well for others will serve you well in life. It's been a pleasure.

PLACE YOUR QUOTED MATERIALS IN QUOTE TAGS, NOT QUOTES! The mod made that clear.

Hypnotherapy did not cure the ichthyosis. That's a fact. It simply helped the patient deal with the disease which in this case was a genetic disease. You can fall for the woo in that book or you can read the discussions in the BMJ which make it abundantly clear that hypnosis did not cure the patient. The only use for hypnosis in cancer treatment is to help the patient deal with the life threatening cancer and the treatments.

In the case of the pain med being tested it was found to be effective in other areas, not in the patient recovery. Although when hypnosis fared better than the meds that does not mean that a med will not be found which is better than hypnosis.

Your next quote is an unsubstantiated opinion piece which pretends that the given study is somehow related tot he conclusion. That is a nonsequitur.

Let me help you with your pointless comments:

1. Science and medicine is well aware of the placebo effect. The studies being done are being done by science and not the wacky woo sites you read.

2. That is an essay about an article in a journal. If you read the article you'd see that it is an introductory study with no current applications. That's normal.

3. So hypnosis is used for the side issues or the simple issues. It is NOT used in treating cancer. It is a side therapy to deal with the trauma of cancer and the side effects of actual treatments.

The issue is not if you use woo or if I use woo. The issue is efficacy. What we see is that hypnosis cannot deal with the tough issues. It cannot cure genetic diseases or cancer. It cannot deal with infections or injuries. It can deal with issues such as diabetes. If you actually read any of the material instead of quoting wacky woo sites you'd understand that hypnosis gets people through short term events.

So now you still try to weasel out of the evidence issue. You pretend that others will not accept new ideas. That is the sort of idiotic nonsense spouted by those foolish woo sites. They simply cannot deal with the fact that their woo is baloney or has limited applicability. The evidence is clear and has been clear for decades: happy patients do better than sad patients.

So you admit that there is no evidence to support all of that nonsense you've been spouting.You denigrate the efforts of doctors all over the world but know that there is no indication at all that these items are any more effective than placebos. In other words, doing nothing is just as good as doing what you suggest.

So you claim that "Millions have seen their lives embettered and sometimes even saved due to awareness of these alternative approaches." If that were true then you'd have some evidence to present. You simply made that up just as woo sites make up their claims. There is no support for this claim is there?

[stereologist]

When snake oil salesmen sell their wares they encourage patients to avoid early detection of their conditions. The damage is done. The sick patient that has transitioned from curable to noncurable finally gets the treatments they need. They end up in a desperate situation and end up dying. The snake oil salesman that effectively killed the patient then points to the failure of modern medicine. How tragic! How sick.

This is the situation that needs to be addressed. Modern medicine is not resisting new ideas, but those ideas have to be shown to be effective. That requires testing and studies. Opinions and the blather from woo sites does not address the issue. It is all about well done testing.

[stereologist]

Rolci, are you aware of the nocebo effect. Notice that placebo is a positive bump. The nocebo is a negative bump.

Recent studies of the placebo effect have shown that even if you tell the patient that the material is ineffective it has a positive effect. If you tell someone that a sugar pill can make you ill people report ill effects. This is an interesting area of study. How does it work? How limited is it? Is there a way to get beyond any observed limitations?

[Rolci]

Have you actually read Coue's work? No, again, I did not think you did, or would, you're too busy waiting for evidence to land on your lap, without having to do some research yourself. Do you know anything about his methods? It's called Conscious Autosuggestion. You see, it's a label. Suggestion is what makes hypnotherapy work. (And I have provided peer-reviewed sources that it does indeed work just to keep you happy, so you can't dispute this fact.) Hypnosis is simply a state of consciousness. On its own it doesn't heal, cure, ameliorate, or help any condition, other that the fact that it provides relaxation. What makes it work is the suggestion that is applied DURING hypnosis. Autosuggestion is just a word to express suggestion provided in a self-induced hypnotic state. The word conscious is quite self-explanatory. But don't just take my word for any of this, I will quote him in his own words.

"... autosuggestion is nothing but hypnotism as I see it, and I would define it in these simple words: The influence of the imagination upon the moral and physical being of mankind."

Emile Coue - Self Mastery Through Concious Autosuggestion p6, further quotes from the same 22-page essay.

Just so you know who Coue was, he began to study hypnosis in 1901. He established a clinic in Nancy in 1910 for treating patients suffering from both mental and physical disorders, using his technique of autosuggestion, which is really straightforward hypnotic suggestion and post-hypnotic suggestion.

He claims that will, as in will-power, "always yields to the imagination. It is an absolute rule that admits of no exception." To illustrate this he provides the following example:

"Suppose that we place on the ground a plank 30 feet long by 1 foot wide. It is evident that everybody will be capable of going from one end to the other of this plank without stepping over the edge. But now change the conditions of the experiment, and imagine this plank placed at the height of the towers of a cathedral. Who then will be capable of advancing even a few feet along this narrow path? Could you hear me speak? Probably not. Before you had taken two steps you would begin to tremble, and in spite of every effort of your will you would be certain to fall to the ground.

Why is it then that you would not fall if the plank is on the ground, and why should you fall if it is raised to a height above the ground? Simply because in the first case you imagine that it is easy to go to the end of this plank, while in the second case you imagine that you cannot do so.

Notice that your will is powerless to make you advance; if you imagine that you cannot, it is absolutely impossible for you to do so."

He goes on to provide further basics, case studies, detailing methodologies, and towards the end of the book he goes on to detail his own professional experiences that accumulated over the years. Page 18 opens with the title A FEW TYPICAL CURES. I will quote one random case here for an idea:

"M. M______, a working hosier living at Sainte-Savine near Troyes, paralyzed for two years as the result of injuries at the junction of the spinal column and the pelvis. The paralysis is only in the lower limbs, in which the circulation of the blood has practically ceased, making them swollen, congested, and discolored. Several treatments, including the antisyphilitic, have been tried without success. Preliminary experiments successful; suggestion applied by me, and autosuggestion by the patient for eight days. At the end of this time there is an almost imperceptible but still appreciable movement of the left leg. Renewed suggestion. In eight days the improvement is noticeable. Every week or fortnight there is an increased improvement with progressive lessening of the swelling, and so on. Eleven months afterwards, on the first of November, 1906, the patient goes downstairs alone and walks 800 yards, and in the month of July, 1907, goes back to the factory where he has continued to work since that time, with no trace of paralysis."

Other diseases he cured includes asthma, confirming no relapse afterwards, enteritis, acute neurasthenia, dyspepsia, gastralgia, eczema, congestion of the lungs, cerebral disturbance which manifests itself by uncontrollable nervous trembling, and lots more.

Of course one can claim that he's lying. He was a modest old chap, didn't accept money, was only offering to help through self-empowerment, which you are viciously trying to oppose, we both know why. As Gordon F. Sander said:

"He did not consider himself a genius, did not despise professional contemporaries, did not suffer from paranoid delusions, did not have “strong compulsions to focus his attacks on the greater scientists and their theories,” or write in a complex, technical jargon. Quite the opposite was true: the pudgy chemist was extremely modest and self-deprecating, never claiming to have been an original thinker; he saw himself as an ally rather than a foe of the medical and scientific establishment; the jovial old man was anything but paranoid, and he could not have confused any literate person with his plain-worded theory. All of this, of course, only served to increase his appeal. Note also that Coué refused to charge for his service as autosuggestionist and lecturer; one hesitates to brand him a charlatan because of his unmistakable charity."

http://gordonsander.com/2000/04/day-by-day-in-every-way-i-am-getting-better-and-better/

I do not expect anybody to believe this man. I simply invite anyone to do more research into his work, his methods, and hypnotherapy in general. Before hypnotherapy was proven to be efficacious, it was also considered, quite understandably, woo-woo, as our friend here likes to say 200 times in each of his post, which makes me want to wee-wee. Hypnotherapists have been trying to convince poor suckers wasting their hard-earned cash on painkillers that hypnotherapy will do the same and more, for free. Nobody listened. Buddhist monks have been trying to tell the west about the benefits of meditation for thousands of years, but generations passed who could've utilized it but either didn't know much about it, or cried "where is the evidence?", instead of trying it to see for themselves. (Which is the easiest thing to do in the world.) Unfortunately, now that you DO have your precious evidence, that doesn't mean that you're going to get your wasted cash back. Gone forever, I'm afraid. Just like poor Aunt Berta, whom conventional medicine couldn't help, but never tried alternative, because she wasn't aware, or her family were waiting for the evidence (aka giving away the power of personal initiative to imagined authorities.)

Only in the last 1-2 decades have studies started showing more and more strong evidence for the beneficial health effects of meditation, a practice that modern westerners do not normally practice (even though it's free). It would be naive to think that what we have been forced to admit works so far is all there is. Just like it would be naive to assert that what we have found hypnotherapy so far to have effect in is all it will ever be proven to have effect in. It makes more sense to realize that as more and more studies are conducted, more and more so-far-considered-woo methods will turn out to be effective. Not necessarily all, or even many, but at least some. Especially the ones that work on the same basis. Hypnotherapy (either hypnosis or self-hypnosis aka Conscious Autosuggestion) works by convincing the subconscious. I don't know about placebo, but my guess is it's the same. I might be wrong. But both work. Creative visualization, affirmations, EFT tapping, NLP, all work by working at the subconscious level, the power of which we are only beginning to understand. In essence, they are all the same, with different outer manifestations, but working on the same principle.

Edited September 19, 2014 by Rolci

[Rolci]

Hypnotherapy works using hypnosis. The hypnotic trance state can be characterized by varying degrees of depth. Hypnotherapy only works with individuals that can be hypnotized into a certain depth of trance. Creative visualization is bound to work when the same level of relaxed state is achieved, and, same as in hypnosis, impression (in this case visual, as opposed to audio in the case of hypnotherapy) is made on the subconscious. Affirmations in a relaxed state are practically the same as CA. For those that require a less deep trance state for their subconscious to become impressionable, EFT tapping will work like a charm. All these methods are one and the same thing, just given different names used in slightly different ways.

Hey, after page 5 we're back to square one. This is exactly what I said in my OP. Why did we have to go around in a circle? Never mind, I have a nice stack of peer-reviewed material about hypnotherapy now, and plenty of studies and research material about the rest. I had no idea about the 2013 study that reveals gene expression changes with meditation, and the 2014 research that suggests the possibility to influence autonomic nervous system and immune response. I guess I must thank you guys, now we have something to work with. Plenty of evidence for most, at least a good indication for you guys. Good on Wim Hof he doesn't catch flues and colds. So you guys are happy to keep buying flu medicines UNTIL on top of this body of research you have, a peer-reviewed article is published, say in 2018, at which point all of a sudden you will magically want to do yoga and meditation to prevent diseases and infections? Hope nothing serious happens while you wait for your evidence. In the meantime, make the most of your proven hypnotherapy. (Like you ever will. Why did you need the evidence again? I keep asking, but never get a reply - you keep asking, but never apply. LOL)

[stereologist]

Have you actually read Coue's work? No, again, I did not think you did, or would, you're too busy waiting for

"... autosuggestion is nothing but hypnotism as I see it, and I would define it in these simple words: The influence of the imagination upon the moral and physical being of mankind."

<snip>

I don't have to read drivel to know it is drivel. You need to turn on at least a modicum of critical thinking and start to see how ridiculous your inferences are. You need to see how you treat modern medicine and your woo-woo baloney very differently. I have seen no effort on your part to show that any of your woo-woo malarkey has any effect on cancer, yet you want to point out that modern medicine has a long way to go in cancer treatment. As if the medical did not understand that issue.

Your peer reviewed work shows your woo-woo has little to minor benefits. In fact, your comments here simply agree with my position that these woo-woo things you tout are similar to the placebo effect.

The plank example is something of interest to me since I've spent a great deal of time at great heights with dead vertical drops of 1000m at times. And when I mean dead vertical mean that if you fell you'd never bounce till you impacted the ground. When a plank is at height there are real threats such as wind. So its not the same. People adjust their actions to the perceived threat. I've been at those heights without the benefit of a foot wide ledge and I can say that will power does not always yield to imagination. That claim is utterly false. Think a little and you will come up with many examples of will-power handily overtaking imagination.

The story of the paralyzed person is one in which the patient was not paralyzed. The person had sustained injuries which led the person to not walk. That is not uncommon. Getting people to motivate themselves is not always easy. Was paralysis cured? No. Was the person's unwillingness to try cured? That it was. That is the sort of story of triumph over adversity that surely warms everyone's heart.

Notice the time frame for these "cures." Even today we see all sorts of claims from ministers and psychic surgeons and others of such cures. Miraculous cures have been claimed through the ages. The odd thing about these miraculous cures is that they are never verified.

And what you call research is simply taking everything hook, line, and sinker if it challenges whatever you consider an authority. Such an attitude is not rare. IIRC around 10% of the population operates in that mode. They identify whatever they believe is an authority and then accept any viewpoint without question if it challenges that authority.

Studies have been done concerning such things as meditation. Does it cure cancer? No. Does it cure anything at all? No evidence yet although practitioners make such outrageous and unwarranted claims.

It is extremely naive or disingenuous to suggest that real medicine ever thinks that the practices in place are perfect. It is real medicine that is investigating what works and what does not. The woo-clan does not test anything. They just publish books and articles and websites for the foolish and gullible. What is being determined is that the woo ideas for the most part rely on the placebo effect to be effective. For example, acupuncture and mock acupuncture have the same effect. If you use a needle or tell the person you are using a needle you get the same result. You get the same effect by handing the person a sugar pill, telling them it is a sugar and has no meds in it, and then telling them that it does make most people feel better. So why go to all of the shenanigans of EFT tapping, or whatever woo is the new and improved fad when a simpler direct method does the same?

So where does all of your woo fit in with cancer or any of the hard to deal with diseases. Still waiting on your response.

Edited September 19, 2014 by stereologist

[stereologist]

Hypnotherapy works using hypnosis. The hypnotic trance state can be characterized by varying degrees of depth. Hypnotherapy only works with individuals that can be hypnotized into a certain depth of trance. Creative visualization is bound to work when the same level of relaxed state is achieved, and, same as in hypnosis, impression (in this case visual, as opposed to audio in the case of hypnotherapy) is made on the subconscious. Affirmations in a relaxed state are practically the same as CA. For those that require a less deep trance state for their subconscious to become impressionable, EFT tapping will work like a charm. All these methods are one and the same thing, just given different names used in slightly different ways.

Hey, after page 5 we're back to square one. This is exactly what I said in my OP. Why did we have to go around in a circle? Never mind, I have a nice stack of peer-reviewed material about hypnotherapy now, and plenty of studies and research material about the rest. I had no idea about the 2013 study that reveals gene expression changes with meditation, and the 2014 research that suggests the possibility to influence autonomic nervous system and immune response. I guess I must thank you guys, now we have something to work with. Plenty of evidence for most, at least a good indication for you guys. Good on Wim Hof he doesn't catch flues and colds. So you guys are happy to keep buying flu medicines UNTIL on top of this body of research you have, a peer-reviewed article is published, say in 2018, at which point all of a sudden you will magically want to do yoga and meditation to prevent diseases and infections? Hope nothing serious happens while you wait for your evidence. In the meantime, make the most of your proven hypnotherapy. (Like you ever will. Why did you need the evidence again? I keep asking, but never get a reply - you keep asking, but never apply. LOL)

There is an important limitation of hypnotherapy. You have to fall for it. I mean you have to believe in it.

Typically the failures of woo are written off. The practitioners of woo do not want to do real experiments in which the method can be shown to be ineffective. How often does hypnotherapy fail? How many individuals do not benefit from this method? If the answer is around half then it becomes a questionable method.

It hardly matters if hypnotherapy can be shown to do some effects on the body if that effect is limited. The evidence you have suggests minimal benefits and certainly not a cure for cancer which you point out is not addressed by real medicine. Does hynotherapy offer a cure for cancer. No. Does it offer a cure for chicken pox, or pertussin, or rubella, or any diseases that are common? No. You point out one person does not get flus or cold. Well whoopee doo-dah. I don't either. One thing you really need to learn is that case studies are no longer done. I'll repeat this since it is so important. Case studies are no longer done. Phased out decades ago.

I'll try hypnotherapy next time I get blisters or some other simple issue which does not need real medicine.

Why do I need the evidence? because I want to know if the practice is effective. That is what differentiates me from stupid.

[Astra.]

That is what differentiates me from stupid.

Who called you stupid? Are you projecting?

Sorry mate, but I'm doing a "Psychology Course" atm....and forums are a good start

[Rolci]

Would you forget cancer already. And blabbering about limitations. Does aspirin cure cancer? No. What do you want these methods to be? A universal panacea? Everything has limitations, there is no cure-all method. All I'm saying is, be aware of the available alternative possibilities. For those who have no medical insurance (like millions in the US), or can't afford prescription drugs, or they don't seem to achieve the desired effect, it costs nothing to try an alternative method. The fact is, each has a chance that it might work. So if you have nothing to lose, why not give it a try? Or even if there is a medical cure, if your condition is not serious, like a simple headache, you can try a method just to see what happens. If it happens to work, and try again next time, and again, and there is a consistent positive result, you've already saved money on drugs, and can carry on saving more. I've told my wife, but she doesn't listen. Guess what's happened over the years. One pill wasn't enough. Then two. Now she's at the point where she never takes less than 4 pills for a headache, and lately she's started reporting that even 4 is not enough, no effect. And if you consider the long-term dangers from the continuous use of paracetamol (as described in the cover story "The Problem With Paracetamol - Has The Worlds Favorite Drug Had Its Day?" (31 May 2014) of the New Scientist), I'll pass. So with nothing to lose, time to try alternative. But to make a choice, first you have to be aware of the choices. Hence this topic.

There is an important limitation of hypnotherapy. You have to fall for it. I mean you have to believe in it.

You forgot your source. I always give mine, but you never give yours, just blabber and blabber. Do you need to believe in placebo? If I recall it was you that pointed it out the nocebo effect - even if you know it's a sugar pill (i.e. nothing even to believe in) it works.

So I'll need your peer-reviewed article from a trusted source to back up your dubious claim that if you don't believe in it then it doesn't work.

I did a quick check and found the following:

"Why does Hypnotherapy work better for some people than others?

It may be to do with the skill of the Hypnotherapist! However, the biggest single factor in the success of hypnotherapy is the client’s desire to change or get well. In addition to therapy, this may involve appropriate lifestyle/behavioural changes, which hypnotherapy will of course help with. A commitment to ongoing therapy may also be required. (See How Many Sessions will I need?)

Quick fixes do happen, but sometimes there are underlying causes of the presenting problem which may need to be addressed first. Belief in hypnotherapy is not essential in order to achieve success but the desire to change is.

http://www.nottingham-hypnotherapy.com/faq/who-can-hypnotherapy-help/

Furthermore there is a whole chapter on this in David Lesser's book Hypnotherapy Explained: I Heard Every Word. To quote from the chapter "Is Belief Necessary?"

"Belief in Hypnotherapy is no requirement for a cure. Even a straight forward disbelief is no hindrance as long as the patient is prepared to go along with the words that I use."

page 119

Also, on page 97 of The Spokesman-Review, issue March 17, 2007, you read the following:

"a belief in hypnotherapy is not necessary to reach success, only a desire to make a change."

But I'm sure you know what you're talking about, so I'm awaiting your source that proves these 4 hypnotherapists wrong.

What I'd love to see is studies where patients are given actual drugs but are told it's something that is supposed to enhance their symptoms for a couple days so further experiments can be made. That would really tell us how much of the effect of drugs is actually just placebo. I wonder what percentage would actually report feeling better when their subconscious truly and honestly believes they are expected to get worse! Where are these studies??

And lastly, would you care to tell me why any doctor, medical institution, or pharmaceutical company would want to investigate, do research, and conduct studies on something that has even the remotest possibility to cure all diseases, or prevent infections? Besides the desire to lose their jobs and billions of dollars of course.

Edited September 19, 2014 by Rolci

[stereologist]

Who called you stupid? Are you projecting?

Sorry mate, but I'm doing a "Psychology Course" atm....and forums are a good start

Why do you jump to hasty conclusions? I'm sure that is covered in your course.

[Astra.]

Why do you jump to hasty conclusions? I'm sure that is covered in your course.

Yes, it is covered in my course....and no, I'm not jumping to conclusions.

[stereologist]

Would you forget cancer already. And blabbering about limitations. Does aspirin cure cancer? No. What do you want these methods to be? A universal panacea? Everything has limitations, there is no cure-all method. All I'm saying is, be aware of the available alternative possibilities. For those who have no medical insurance (like millions in the US), or can't afford prescription drugs, or they don't seem to achieve the desired effect, it costs nothing to try an alternative method. The fact is, each has a chance that it might work. So if you have nothing to lose, why not give it a try? Or even if there is a medical cure, if your condition is not serious, like a simple headache, you can try a method just to see what happens. If it happens to work, and try again next time, and again, and there is a consistent positive result, you've already saved money on drugs, and can carry on saving more. I've told my wife, but she doesn't listen. Guess what's happened over the years. One pill wasn't enough. Then two. Now she's at the point where she never takes less than 4 pills for a headache, and lately she's started reporting that even 4 is not enough, no effect. And if you consider the long-term dangers from the continuous use of paracetamol (as described in the cover story "The Problem With Paracetamol - Has The Worlds Favorite Drug Had Its Day?" (31 May 2014) of the New Scientist), I'll pass. So with nothing to lose, time to try alternative. But to make a choice, first you have to be aware of the choices. Hence this topic.

You forgot your source. I always give mine, but you never give yours, just blabber and blabber. Do you need to believe in placebo? If I recall it was you that pointed it out the nocebo effect - even if you know it's a sugar pill (i.e. nothing even to believe in) it works.

What I'd love to see is studies where patients are given actual drugs but are told it's something that is supposed to enhance their symptoms for a couple days so further experiments can be made. That would really tell us how much of the effect of drugs is actually just placebo. I wonder what percentage would actually report feeling better when their subconscious truly and honestly believes they are expected to get worse! Where are these studies??

And lastly, would you care to tell me why any doctor, medical institution, or pharmaceutical company would want to investigate, do research, and conduct studies on something that has even the remotest possibility to cure all diseases, or prevent infections? Besides the desire to lose their jobs and billions of dollars of course.

No I have no intention of dropping cancer since you brought it up and went over and over and over issues about the difficulties of treating cancer. So please tell us what your ramblings were all about in terms of cancer and the woo you tout.

As for your ridiculous question about aspirin and cancer I can only say that aspirin is not used as a cure by real medicine. Is it used as a cure by your woo? How does your woo deal with addressing cancer, diabetes, MRSA, and other difficult to treat diseases?

As I pointed out before we want to know the efficacy before simply wasting time on an ineffective treatment. If there is no efficacy beyond the placebo effect then simply dish out sugar pills and tell people they are sugar pills.

So now you claim that "The fact is, each has a chance that it might work." Really, it's a fact? Please provide the evidence to support that fact.

The woo treatments work best for vague things such as mild headaches, tired, lethargic, no pep, general unease, etc. That is where woo survives, in dealing with the vague.

Where such treatments fail is where people try things on their own before getting a check up. They go fro the curable stage to the uncurable stage. Time wasted on ineffective and inappropriate treatments is time that allows disease to progress from treatable to untreatable.

Your entire process has been to make unwarranted inferences and post questionable anecdotes. I could toss out anecdotes to counter your woo, but as I have stated anecdotes are meaningless and so are case studies.

Please look up the nocebo effect. You have it quite wrong. The nocebo effect is along the lines of giving someone a sugar pill and warning that this pill causes headaches in some people. They get a headache from a sugar pill.

As far as drugs are concerned, if you actually spent some time reading the studies instead of relying on some wacko woo site to explain the studies to you, you'd learn that studies address the placebo effect. The efficacy of drugs includes showing that the drug outperforms a placebo.

Your last question appears to be mistyped. I assume you are asking why would doctors evaluate woo which would cost them their jobs. You have posted studies showing that woo is being tested and it acts about the same as a placebo. Does that answer your question? Or do you think that your woo is much better than its poor performance in actual testing?

Yes, it is covered in my course....and no, I'm not jumping to conclusions.

But you did.

[Astra.]

No I have no intention of dropping cancer since you brought it up and went over and over and over issues about the difficulties of treating cancer. So please tell us what your ramblings were all about in terms of cancer and the woo you tout.

As for your ridiculous question about aspirin and cancer I can only say that aspirin is not used as a cure by real medicine. Is it used as a cure by your woo? How does your woo deal with addressing cancer, diabetes, MRSA, and other difficult to treat diseases?

As I pointed out before we want to know the efficacy before simply wasting time on an ineffective treatment. If there is no efficacy beyond the placebo effect then simply dish out sugar pills and tell people they are sugar pills.

So now you claim that "The fact is, each has a chance that it might work." Really, it's a fact? Please provide the evidence to support that fact.

The woo treatments work best for vague things such as mild headaches, tired, lethargic, no pep, general unease, etc. That is where woo survives, in dealing with the vague.

Where such treatments fail is where people try things on their own before getting a check up. They go fro the curable stage to the uncurable stage. Time wasted on ineffective and inappropriate treatments is time that allows disease to progress from treatable to untreatable.

Your entire process has been to make unwarranted inferences and post questionable anecdotes. I could toss out anecdotes to counter your woo, but as I have stated anecdotes are meaningless and so are case studies.

Please look up the nocebo effect. You have it quite wrong. The nocebo effect is along the lines of giving someone a sugar pill and warning that this pill causes headaches in some people. They get a headache from a sugar pill.

As far as drugs are concerned, if you actually spent some time reading the studies instead of relying on some wacko woo site to explain the studies to you, you'd learn that studies address the placebo effect. The efficacy of drugs includes showing that the drug outperforms a placebo.

Your last question appears to be mistyped. I assume you are asking why would doctors evaluate woo which would cost them their jobs. You have posted studies showing that woo is being tested and it acts about the same as a placebo. Does that answer your question? Or do you think that your woo is much better than its poor performance in actual testing?

But you did.

No, I am not S.

[stereologist]

As I pointed out earlier, one of the signs of fraud is to see that someone attacks the establishment, but does not apply the same standards to their own beliefs.

Such is the case here with the statements about cancer and then a refusal to show that the methods being proposed are completely ineffective when it comes to cancer or any hard to treat disease. If woo wants to point out that yes indeed medicine does have hard to treat diseases such as cancer, then woo needs to buck up and deal with its limitations.

So here is the typical woo response "Would you forget cancer already. And blabbering about limitations."

If woo wants to ever be part of an accepted process, then it must do better than hiding when the spotlight is turned on it.

[Rolci]

So now you claim that "The fact is, each has a chance that it might work." Really, it's a fact? Please provide the evidence to support that fact.

It is indeed a fact. That possibilities exist is a fact. That it is possible that an undetected meteor might hit the Earth tomorrow is a fact. That your house might burn down next week is a fact. No evidence is needed, that's why it's called POSSIBILITY, and not CERTAINTY, you silly.

Where such treatments fail is where people try things on their own before getting a check up. They go fro the curable stage to the uncurable stage. Time wasted on ineffective and inappropriate treatments is time that allows disease to progress from treatable to untreatable.

Nothing to do with the methods. People are expected to have brains and get a check-up first, and use alternative when all else fails, or the threat is minimal, like a headache. If some people are stupid, they get what is coming to them. It's called natural selection. Some people drink before they drive, and innocent people die. Do you see alcohols being banned? I don't. YOU ASSUME PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY!

As far as drugs are concerned, if you actually spent some time reading the studies instead of relying on some wacko woo site to explain the studies to you, you'd learn that studies address the placebo effect. The efficacy of drugs includes showing that the drug outperforms a placebo.

Not what I was asking. Read it again. Give them meds, tell them it's pain enhancer. Where's the effectiveness now?

You have posted studies showing that woo is being tested and it acts about the same as a placebo. Does that answer your question? Or do you think that your woo is much better than its poor performance in actual testing?

Please provide peer-reviewed articles that prove they absolutely don't work. I haven't seen a single one.

And I'm still waiting for your peer-reviewed source for your silly claim that if you don't believe in hypnotherapy then it doesn't work. I've given you 3 references that it does. You're not doing to well so far. You need to start applying the same standards to yourself that you expect of me. Sources please.

Edited September 19, 2014 by Rolci