Logic instead of religion

[seatonheating]

Oh, I'm sure I'll get beat up for this from most of you.

This is why I choose logic......................not religion. This crap happens way too often. Where is their faith after this happens??

Go ahead, try to justify it.

http://www.komotv.com/news/national/17057006.html

[oloenneker]

They can't. These are the same people that will claim that people in the Middle East are "insane" yet you can rely on "religion" to cure you kid's disease? Nuts, just plain nuts.

Last I heard, the case in Oregon City is going up for review by the DA in order to file charges against the parents. Good! It's Homicide if you ask me.

[bootlen]

What? You only read threads you start?

http://hvac-talk.com/vbb/showthread.php?t=166674

[jrbenny]

It takes logic to truly accept and understand your religion.

Those clones are brain dead idiots.

[RoBoTeq]

I don't buy into the theology that those people believe in and I don't believe that God expects us to. Then again, they made a choice about their own and I feel they should have a right to do so.

As far as I am concerned, God gave us the ability to learn and make choices about how to use our knowledge and so the medical industry can be a two edged sword. I am alive today only because of recent breakthroughs in medical knowledge. My oldest boy is a medical miracle having survived two brain surgeries. Ya know what the top doc of head trauma in the world told my family after the surgery? "We did the only thing we knew to do which was to remove the damaged section of your boys brain with the equivelent of a shop vac to prevent the brains swelling from crushing it. What we did was basically archaic and without knowledge of a result. Everything else that happens, is due to whatever you believe in spiritually."

My oldest boy was never expected to survive that head injury and given a zero chance to be other then a vegetable if he did. My boy is now in his late thirties, married with three children, works as an Acad draftsman for a sprinkler company and works as a volunteer firefighter/EMT for his community fire department.

My point is that the choice to allow medical knowledge "save" your child is not as cut and dry as some make it out to be. My ex-wife and I needed to make a very difficult decision to basically turn over all rights of our boy to the medical facility (Maryland General Hospital's Shock-Trauma unit) or let him die. Had the decision been mine alone, my boy would not have been survived. In the end, I believe it was God who saved my boy because God heard our prayers and knew our desperation of making the decision to allow medical science to do the little they knew to do to keep my boy alive. There was no easy right or wrong factor about this.

So, I don't agree with those who deny medical science, but I will respect their decisions when it comes to their own child. In the end, we are all going to wind up deceased. Does the when and the where really matter in the end?

[hvacker]

Oh, I'm sure I'll get beat up for this from most of you.

This is why I choose logic......................not religion. This crap happens way too often. Where is their faith after this happens??

Go ahead, try to justify it.

http://www.komotv.com/news/national/17057006.html

Both Logic and Religion are branches of Philosophy.

I don't think this tragedy had anything to do with ether.
People can be talked into drinking Koolaide and other bizarre things in the name of God but where is God in all of it.
There's a part of many people where their rational brain fails them.

[Andy Schoen]

This is why I choose logic......................not religion.

IMHO, there are two forms of religion: one consistent with the scientific method, and the other crappier versions that are not.

God exists, IMHO. ;)

[sysint]

IMHO, there are two forms of religion: one consistent with the scientific method, and the other crappier versions that are not.
God exists, IMHO. ;)I like this statement so far.

[hvacker]

IMHO, there are two forms of religion: one consistent with the scientific method, and the other crappier versions that are not.

God exists, IMHO. ;)

Yup, the crappy ones are popular me thinks as the other takes too much work.
I believe there is Hebrew word for meditation that translates to " A cow chewing on it's cud"
Like cows do, over and over again dwelling on the Word and digesting it.

[bootlen]

Yup, the crappy ones are popular me thinks as the other takes too much work.
I believe there is Hebrew word for meditation that translates to " A cow chewing on it's cud"
Like cows do, over and over again dwelling on the Word and digesting it.

Yup. Sure is.

[yelram]

Logic tells a person that the better he treats himself, the better.... Religion for the most part teaches that the better a person treats others, the better off he is. I really find that its similar to the two pronounced forms of economy. Communism, or capitalism. I prefer my religion to be similar to communism, while my economy to be capitalist.

[bootlen]

Logic tells a person that the better he treats himself, the better.... Religion for the most part teaches that the better a person treats others, the better off he is. I really find that its similar to the two pronounced forms of economy. Communism, or capitalism. I prefer my religion to be similar to communism, while my economy to be capitalist.

Communism is a perverted bastardization of Christianity.

[yelram]

Christianity is a perverted bastardization of Christianity.

fixed..

[bootlen]

fixed..

I'm sure that makes perfect sense to you.

[classical]

Logic tells a person that the better he treats himself, the better.... Religion for the most part teaches that the better a person treats others, the better off he is. I really find that its similar to the two pronounced forms of economy. Communism, or capitalism. I prefer my religion to be similar to communism, while my economy to be capitalist.

Reading your post verifies exactly what you have posted and in the end you will be an unhappy failure.

If your religion is communism that means your god is the state and having the state as your god will not allow you to have capitalism as your economy. In essence you will owe your worth and your self esteem to the state.

Since you feel this way you should move to Russia, they are trying this right now and it is such a rousing success. I am sure you can find a Russian to willing change places with you.

[yelram]

I'm sure that makes perfect sense to you.

If you knew the WORD, not the words, you would know exactly what I mean.

Classical:

Nooooooo, I believe you totally misinterpreted my response. Communism is based on the IDEA of a greater good, the problem with it is that the greater good is enforced by a governmental entity. The same reason organized religion is prone to failure, TOO MANY PEOPLE IN POSITIONS OF POWER. The idea is good, everyone gets treated "equally". In an ideal world, where humans were angels, this would be the way to go, so thats how I attempt to treat people, as equals, as I would expect to be treated. I find a citizen is required to be selfish, and a human being is required to be selfless, for the world to work correctly. Communism is an attempt to apply philosophy to governance. Which is always a FAIL sort of situation. What I dont understand is that Marx called religion the "opiate of the masses" but created a form of government that removed God. I assume this was a misdirected attempt to give the "power to the people", but I digress.

[bootlen]

If you knew the WORD, not the words, you would know exactly what I mean.

Suppose I don't know the Word. Suppose you explain what you mean.

Nooooooo, I believe you totally misinterpreted my response. Communism is based on the IDEA of a greater good, the problem with it is that the greater good is enforced by a governmental entity. The same reason organized religion is prone to failure, TOO MANY PEOPLE IN POSITIONS OF POWER. The idea is good, everyone gets treated "equally". In an ideal world, where humans were angels, this would be the way to go, so thats how I attempt to treat people, as equals, as I would expect to be treated. I find a citizen is required to be selfish, and a human being is required to be selfless, for the world to work correctly. Communism is an attempt to apply philosophy to governance. Which is always a FAIL sort of situation. What I dont understand is that Marx called religion the "opiate of the masses" but created a form of government that removed God. I assume this was a misdirected attempt to give the "power to the people", but I digress.

Which is what makes it perverted.

[yelram]

If you knew the WORD, not the words, you would know exactly what I mean.

Suppose I don't know the Word. Suppose you explain what you mean.



If you believe that Jesus is God, you are not listening to Jesus. If you worship Jesus, as God, you dont understand the message. If you believe in the concept of the trinity, you are making things up to rationalize a belief system that Jesus never taught. Christianity has been perverted by its believers, and those who sought to use it as a source of power since the gnostics were driven out of it. The true nature of Christs teachings regarded finding god in everything.

[bootlen]

If you believe that Jesus is God, you are not listening to Jesus. If you worship Jesus, as God, you dont understand the message. If you believe in the concept of the trinity, you are making things up to rationalize a belief system that Jesus never taught. Christianity has been perverted by its believers, and those who sought to use it as a source of power since the gnostics were driven out of it. The true nature of Christs teachings regarded finding god in everything.

Totally false. And the only personal power promised by God to Christians is the power to overcome sin.

[yelram]

Totally false. And the only personal power promised by God to Christians is the power to overcome sin.
Wow, that is a fantastic refutation. (/sarcasm) I know if someone totally disassembled my belief system, I would have alot more to say than "Totally false".

Noone overcomes sin.

I bet you believe that being "born again" means you've decided to follow christianity right? Even though Jesus' talk with Nicodemus is more than clear.

[bootlen]

Wow, that is a fantastic refutation. (/sarcasm) I know if someone totally disassembled my belief system, I would have alot more to say than "Totally false".

Of course you would. But then you haven't been through this in this forum ad infinitum.

Noone overcomes sin.

Not true. I overcome sin several times a day. Of course I yield to it way too many times a day but then only Jesus is perfect.

I bet you believe that being "born again" means you've decided to follow christianity right? Even though Jesus' talk with Nicodemus is more than clear.

I know you're trying to make sense, yel, but you're not. Wanna try this one again? But do it fast.The little lady is home and I promised to watch a movie with her.

[Snapperhead]

In the end, I believe it was God who saved my boy because God heard our prayers and knew our desperation of making the decision to allow medical science to do the little they knew to do to keep my boy alive. Look . God doesnt heal , nor does he kill anyone . I have never seen it happen , nor have I heard of it . ( well unless you give all the money you can afford to an evangelist ofcourse )

You are created through a egg , and a sperm . You are inheritantly given the ability to heal yourself in many different levels . You get cut , it makes a scab and heals . You get a cold , your body fights it off . You get a headache .... take an asprin ;)

But for you to believe some god swooped down from the heavens and saved your boy is a little wishful thinking . God doesnt heal anyone my friend . There would be alot of people on earth today if he did .Those doctors that went in his brain with the shop vac did a dam good job , and granted with alot of lucky decisions made while in there made your sons body able to heal the problem itsself ... I think they gave his body a little jump start .... but he had a good immune system that kicked ass and won the battle .

There are millions of others who arent here today who have similar problems . Now let me ask you .... do you still believe god just decided to let the others die and your boy was the special chosen one ... or maybe his body was ready for battle with the help of some good doctors with a lucky decision ?

Now dont get me wrong .... I believe something created us ... yup sure did ... but after creating us .... its up to us to carry on . Like a bird leaving her young after they can fly .... same same .

[bootlen]

Look . God doesnt heal , nor does he kill anyone . I have never seen it happen , nor have I heard of it . ( well unless you give all the money you can afford to an evangelist ofcourse )


I know several people who were given a certain amount of time to die due to cancer. But when theey went in for another check-up, the cancer was gone. Not in remission...gone.

[hvac_superman]

God created doctors too you know. Not lawyers but i'm pretty sure doctors.
Why not reap the rewards of his accomplishment.:D

[scrogdog]

I know several people who were given a certain amount of time to die due to cancer. But when theey went in for another check-up, the cancer was gone. Not in remission...gone.

So?

This argument works against you, not for you.

How many times in the past have we seen "gods" made responsible for things that we don't understand? How many times have we seen the science explain a thing such that there was no longer any need to call on gods for an explanation?

How is this different?

It isn't.

[bootlen]

So?

This argument works against you, not for you.

How many times in the past have we seen "gods" made responsible for things that we don't understand? How many times have we seen the science explain a thing such that there was no longer any need to call on gods for an explanation?

How is this different?

It isn't.

Yer not makin' good sense, Scrog. They have been through all the tests, cancer is confirmed, then final check-ups are performed to assure proper treatment dosage, etc. But now there is no sign of cancer.

And I know of one guy in Abilene, TX, who, in his early 30's, had a terminal case of inoperable cancer, was given 6 months, and he began preparing his family for life without him. He resigned from his job and began a ministry to terminal cancer patients he swore he would stay in until he died. That was in 1980 or '81. He still runs that ministry today.

[scrogdog]

Of course I am, you just aren't listening. :)

Again, man has described what has amazed him and was as yet unexplained as the act of god or gods for pretty much as long as men have been on Earth.

We didn't know how lightning manifested itself, and it was something amazing... astounding... that could only be the work of a God (since no one could eplain such a fantastic event otherwise)!

Now, of course, no one talks about the intervention of God or gods when lighting strikes because *we now know how it works".

Countless examples exist throughout time.

Now, you tell me I am not making sense, when all you've done is tell an amazing story, that no one knows how that could possibly happen, and attributed to god because we cannot explain it otherwise.

This is simply more of the same, Boot. One day we'll know the why's and then once again god will be removed from the explanation.

[classical]

Of course I am, you just aren't listening.

Again, man has described what has amazed him and was as yet unexplained as the act of god or gods for pretty much as long as men have been on Earth.

We didn't know how lightning manifested itself, and it was something amazing... astounding... that could only be the work of a God (since no one could eplain such a fantastic event otherwise)!

Now, of course, no one talks about the intervention of God or gods when lighting strikes because *we now know how it works".

Countless examples exist throughout time.

Now, you tell me I am not making sense, when all you've done is tell an amazing story, that no one knows how that could possibly happen, and attributed to god because we cannot explain it otherwise.

This is simply more of the same, Boot. One day we'll know the why's and then once again god will be removed from the explanation.

You will remain a disbeliever until you open your heart to God and allow him to open your eyes to the truth. God is not a logical path it is a trust and a faith that you accept period. I was an agnostic for well over thirty years and every bit as adamant as you, Yelram, Oleo and the rest. I never thought that anything or anyone would convince me otherwise and they did not convince me. My step daughter showed me the way and softened my heart so that God could enter my heart, he opened my eyes to the truth and my life has been the better for it.

I am not well versed in the theology of the bible as many here are but I know the truth of the bible. The truth of God's existence is all around you and you see it every day you just don't recognize it for what it is.

[scrogdog]

When did I say that God doesn't exist?

One could even say that even IF science explains Boot's cancer story, that it was still God that was responsible. Since he possibly gave to us the ability to recover in such a way.

However, just because something is unexplained does not mean that God "magicked up" the situation. I believe there is a scientific explanation for all things, but I still call myself agnostic.

It's probably a nice feeling to believe that God watches over us and takes care of us. And that our loved ones don't truly die and are waiting for us. Unfortunately, you more or less have to rationalize things with the famous and quite tired "strange and mysterious ways" clause. In other words, why are a few saved from cancer and others not?

I was recently informed that my best friend has 6 months to a year to live. Have I prayed to God for his life? Sure! Why not? And if he is miraculously saved, I will thank Him as well.

But I will still not really believe that God is interventionist even if that happens. No harm in trying though, as I see things.

Again, I have nothing against God, but much against the Bible.

[bootlen]

When did I say that God doesn't exist?

One could even say that even IF science explains Boot's cancer story, that it was still God that was responsible. Since he possibly gave to us the ability to recover in such a way.

However, just because something is unexplained does not mean that God "magicked up" the situation. I believe there is a scientific explanation for all things, but I still call myself agnostic.

It's probably a nice feeling to believe that God watches over us and takes care of us. And that our loved ones don't truly die and are waiting for us. Unfortunately, you more or less have to rationalize things with the famous and quite tired "strange and mysterious ways" clause. In other words, why are a few saved from cancer and others not?

I was recently informed that my best friend has 6 months to a year to live. Have I prayed to God for his life? Sure! Why not? And if he is miraculously saved, I will thank Him as well.

But I will still not really believe that God is interventionist even if that happens. No harm in trying though, as I see things.

Again, I have nothing against God, but much against the Bible.

Now you're playing in a different ballpark. There are natural laws which apply to the world as we know it. Then there is the spiritual realm where all the rules are foreign to us in these physical bodies. We are currently subject to natural law. But God is not. He can do anything that is not contrary to His nature.

[yelram]

So?

This argument works against you, not for you.

How many times in the past have we seen "gods" made responsible for things that we don't understand? How many times have we seen the science explain a thing such that there was no longer any need to call on gods for an explanation?

How is this different?

It isn't.

The question is "How many times did stupid anthropologists misunderstand the historical writings of man to be religion". Religion is an oddity of humanity, and its explanation is that there really were intelligent beings that helped to form human civilization. Some scriptures call them angels, others call them more specific terms, but either way they came from the "heavens". That is HEAVENS, as in the sky, not as in some mystical magical place the humans made up to rationalize the writings of the ancients. WHY WOULD HUMANS WASTE TIME AND ENERGY RECORDING HISTORY IF IT WAS ALL JUST A MYTH. There is far more truth in the holy books of the world than modern man gives credit. Modern archeology is based off of the false assumptions of people from the 19th century. People who couldnt conceptualize a computer, or cellphones, or space travel.

Classical - Do you have a reading disability? I never once claimed to be agnostic, not even close. I am an ALLtheist. I believe that there were beings early in human history that helped domesticate us, and even manipulated our DNA. These beings were not "god", but they were referred to as GODS. GOD is much bigger than one religion, or group of people, or planet, or galaxy, or universe. I have never once doubted the existence of god. His method for creation, I see as far more complicated than 6 days of magic wand waving. I think the text of the Torah is very true, but modern interpretation of it is much lacking. The story that genesis is regurgitating is based on Sumerian "myths". I believe that Jesus did die for the sins of humanity, but the reasoning for it is not because he is god incarnate(the most blasphemous of modern christian beliefs), but that he is the last iteration of Adam. Adam was the raw, unperfected man, Jesus is the penultimate conclusion of a human soul. Jesus could die for our sins because he, as Adam, caused there to be sin in the world, he was the true patriarch of the human race. Sin is not bad, it is the way we learn in this world, without the freedom to sin, we would never evolve spiritually. Go read Zecharia Sitchin. Read the books, dont read other peoples opinions.

[scrogdog]

The question is "How many times did stupid anthropologists misunderstand the historical writings of man to be religion".

For example?


Modern archeology is based off of the false assumptions of people from the 19th century.

Oh? How so?


WHY WOULD HUMANS WASTE TIME AND ENERGY RECORDING HISTORY IF IT WAS ALL JUST A MYTH.

Sorry to answer a question with a question, but what do you think the situation was that caused the term "mass hysteria" to be coined? Have we seen any example of this phenomena over time? Why is it, do you think, that there are sucessful con artists? Should we as humans accept all we see at face vailue?

[scrogdog]

Now you're playing in a different ballpark. There are natural laws which apply to the world as we know it. Then there is the spiritual realm where all the rules are foreign to us in these physical bodies. We are currently subject to natural law. But God is not. He can do anything that is not contrary to His nature.

You are completely missing the point. It is not about what is possible for God to do.

It is the simple fact that man has a tendency to assign things that he doesn't understand to a god or gods. Over time, science has erased this perception many, many times. The cancer scenario you present is exactly the same as all of those past ideas.

There are people on this planet, believe it ir not, that have to be assured that all is ok when there is an eclipse of the sun. You think I'm kidding? I'm not.

[bootlen]

There are people on this planet, believe it ir not, that have to be assured that all is ok when there is an eclipse of the sun. You think I'm kidding? I'm not.

I totally agree. But none of them are Christians.

[scrogdog]

I totally agree. But none of them are Christians.

Right. I am only demonstrating a concept. They know nothing of the science involved. Now, eclipses are pretty amazing events even for we who know the score. :) Amazing things tend to get amazing explanations in the absence of true science.

But now that we DO know (well... most of us anyway), it isn't scary... it isn't mysterious, it's just cool (and still amazing).

What I am suggesting is that your cancer story is pretty much the same kind of deal. Just because we can't explain a thing does NOT mean that we should automatically default to God.

[bootlen]

Right. I am only demonstrating a concept. They know nothing of the science involved.

"They"? "They" Christians or "they" people who are wizzed by an eclipse?

What I am suggesting is that your cancer story is pretty much the same kind of deal. Just because we can't explain a thing does NOT mean that we should automatically default to God.

Never said it should. But stats are with me on people prayed for and people not prayed for..

[scrogdog]

As a general rule, I don't mean Christians.

More like tribal folk in Africa and Indonesia.

You seriously have statistics?

Ok, let's see them! Sounds fascinating. :)

[bootlen]

Dang. I gotta remember not to mention that stuff.

No, I don't have them. I believe it was a weekly rag (Newsweek or Time or some such) did a study some years ago. The finding was that those who were prayed for (whether they knew they were prayed for or not) fared better in their hospital stays than those who were not prayed for. Those studied were patients with AND without terminal illnesses/accidents.

But, man, that was some 8 or 10 years ago.

[classical]

Maybe this will help:

Physician Larry Dossey's book Recovering the Soul: A Scientific and Spiritual Approach (1989) begins with the story of Sarah, who had a cardiac arrest during gallbladder surgery and later gave eyewitness details of the operating room and adjacent areas. Sarah had been blind since birth.

Sound mysterious? Unbelievable? Bizarre? Perhaps for some, but not for Dossey, former co-chair of the National Institutes of Health's Panel on Mind/Body Interventions. Unusual phenomena have been the basis of his research since the 1970s.

A general internist and former chief of staff of Graymoor: Atonement Friars, Sisters & Associates in Texas, Dossey has investigated many alternative approaches to traditional medicine. A leading thinker in the area, he is the executive editor of the peer-reviewed journal Alternative Therapies in Health and Medicine. His research interests are varied, but primarily he has championed the healing effects of prayer and its potential as a partner of medical science. And he is finding that, within the medical community, there is an increasing acceptance of the need to explore the effects of spirituality on medicine.

Dossey is a firm believer in conducting research to back up his belief in the correlation between prayer and healing. He points out that there are already excellent examples of double-blind, controlled experimental studies. Take, for example, Dr. Kwang Cha's 2001 study on the effect of prayer on women undergoing in vitro fertilization and embryo transfers. The group that was prayed for had twice the successful pregnancy rate of the group that received no prayers. Or another 2001 study conducted by Dr. Mitchell Krucoff on the effect of prayer on heart disease patients undergoing cardiac catheterization and angioplasty: those prayed for had fewer complications than those in the non-prayed for group. There is also Dr. Elisabeth Targ's 1998 study on the effects of distant healing – often in the form of prayer – on advanced AIDS patients. In her study, the group assigned distant healing had fewer serious illnesses and fewer and shorter hospitalizations than the control group.

One well-known study from 1988, conducted by Dr. Randolph Byrd in the cardiac care unit of Rutland Area Community Services in California, involved about 400 subjects. All were given routine standard care but half also received the prayers of various Christian groups. The half assigned prayer did better in several significant ways: they had fewer cardiac arrests (3 versus 14); they had less need for artificial ventilation (0 versus 12); they required fewer potent drugs such as antibiotics and diuretics; and they had fewer incidents of pneumonia (3 versus 13) and congestive heart failure (8 versus 20). Neither medical staff nor patients knew who was assigned to each group.

Unexpectedly, says Dossey, studies to date show that prayer's effectiveness in healing doesn't depend on the patient having religious or spiritual faith. "Major studies were double-blind and recipients didn't know they were prayed for," he says. Faith and confidence in the process help promote a positive outcome but aren't crucial for prayer's effectiveness.

The Science of Prayer

In 1988, Dossey became the only physician ever invited to deliver the annual Mahatma Gandhi Memorial Lecture in New Delhi, India. He has also described his observations about prayer to audiences at the Pentagon and in the British Parliament. In addition, he has been a guest lecturer at several of the top American teaching hospitals and universities.

Dossey no longer practices internal medicine; instead, he devotes himself full-time to writing, consulting, and speaking. In his research and talks, Dossey does not limit himself to the effects of prayer on the healing process. He has also studied the effects of the mind on the body. For years, Dossey claims, medical scientists have mistakenly treated physical illness as though it were caused only by the improper functioning of the body. He is aiming to use scientific evidence to demonstrate that a patient's thoughts, feelings, and attitude have an impact on their physical well-being, and to convince healthcare professionals of the vital role that a patient's mind and spirit play in the healing process.

Since 1982, Dossey has published nine books, including The New York Times best-seller Healing Words (1993), its sequel, Prayer is Good Medicine (1996), and his most recent work, Healing Beyond the Body (2001). According to the George Washington Institute for Spirituality and Health at the George Washington School of Medicine in Washington, DC, before Healing Words (1993) was published, the curriculum of only three American medical schools included courses about the use of prayer in health. Today, around 80 of the nation's 125 medical schools offer such courses.

The Spirit of Healing

The first high school graduate in his Texan family, Dossey earned high honors at the University of Texas, Austin, received his MD from Southwestern Medical School in Dallas, Texas in 1967, and, following his internship, served as battalion surgeon in Vietnam. Speaking of his experience in combat, Dossey says: "Vietnam filled me with humility and brought me face-to-face with my own vulnerability and mortality."

As a doctor, Dossey was struck by the number of seemingly inexplicable miracle cures that he witnessed. One patient had metastatic lung cancer and recovered after his church congregation prayed for him. Dossey had sent the patient home to die after he refused therapy; one year later, he showed up and the results of his chest X-ray were normal. "This really gets your attention as a doctor. All docs have stories like these."

But not all doctors believe in the healing effects of prayer – in fact, many are highly skeptical. So, what turned Dossey into a believer? Partially, he was attracted to the idea of the unknown. "There will always be phenomena we cannot explain. As someone who adores mystery, I like that." But mostly Dossey was swayed by what he saw as tangible proof of the effect of prayer. "Mainly it was the actual experiments in distant healing and prayer that impressed me as much or more than my own patients. It's hard to ignore properly done studies."

Although he does not belong to any religious group, when he was practicing internal medicine, Dossey prayed every morning before going on hospital rounds. "I can't imagine my life without prayer. It is integral to everything I do."

Not too surprisingly, Dossey is frequently asked why prayer helps in the healing process. As of yet, Dossey is unable to answer this question. While he believes that controlled studies have demonstrated prayer's healing effects, the precise mechanism as to why this is possible remains unknown. But, Dossey adds, whether it can or cannot be explained, "let's be pragmatic and simply use what works."

For more information about Larry Dossey, see his personal website.

[classical]

Or maybe these will interest you:
Kwang Y. Cha, M.D., Daniel P. Wirth, J.D., M.S., and Rogerio A. Lobo, M.D.
Does Prayer Influence the Success of in Vitro Fertilization-Embryo Transfer?:
Report of a Masked, Randomized Trial
J Reprod Med 2001;46:781-787


ABSTRACT

Objective: To assess the potential effect of intercessory prayer (IP) on pregnancy rates in women being treated with in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET).

Study Design: Prospective, double-blind, randomized clinical trial in which patients and providers were not informed about the intervention. Statisticians and investigators were masked until all the data had been collected and clinical outcomes were known. The setting was an IVF-ET program at Cha Hospital, Seoul, Korea. IP was carried out by prayer groups in the United States, Canada and Australia. The investigators were at a tertiary medical center in the United States. The patients were 219 women aged 26-46 years who were consecutively treated with IVF-ET over a four-month period. Randomization was performed after stratification of variables in two groups: distant IP vs. no IP. The clinical pregnancy rates in the two groups were the main outcome measure.

Results: After clinical pregnancies were known, the data were unmasked to assess the effects of IP after assessment of multiple comparisons in a log-linear model. The IP group had a higher pregnancy rate as compared to the no-IP rate (50% vs. 26%, P=.0013). The IP group showed a higher implantation rate (16.3% vs. 8%, P=.0005). Observed effects were independent of clinical or laboratory providers and clinical variables.

Conclusion: A statistically significant difference was observed for the effect of IP on the outcome of IVF-ET, though the data should be interpreted as preliminary. (J Reprod Med 2001;46:781-787)

Keywords: fertilization in vitro, embryo transfer, prayer, complementary medicine, alternative medicine




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Public release date: 28-Sep-2001
Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons
http://cpmcnet.columbia.edu/dept/ps


Prayer may influence in vitro fertilization success

Blinded and randomized international study reveals surprising results New York, NY-Prayer seems to almost double the success rate of in vitro fertilization procedures that lead to pregnancy, according to surprising results from a study carefully designed to eliminate bias.

The controversial findings, published in the September issue of the Journal of Reproductive Medicine, reveal that a group of women who had people praying for them had a 50 percent pregnancy rate compared to a 26 percent rate in the group of women who did not have people praying for them. None of the women undergoing the IVF procedures knew about the praying.

The researchers acknowledge the results seem incredible and say unknown biological factors may be playing a role in the difference between the two groups. But they decided to go public with the results in the hope that other scientists may carry out studies to determine if the findings are reproducible and, if so, what factors might be responsible for the improved success rate in the group of women who had people praying for them.

"We could have ignored the findings, but that would not help to advance the field," says Dr. Rogerio Lobo, chairman of obstetrics and gynecology (OB/GYN) at Columbia University College of Physicians & Surgeons and lead author of the study.

"We are putting the results out there hoping to provoke discussion and see if anything can be learned from it. We would like to understand the biological or other phenomena that led to this almost doubling of the pregnancy rate."

The study, which had several safeguards in place to eliminate bias, involved 199 women planning in vitro fertilization and embryo transfers at the Cha Hospital in Seoul, Korea, between December 1998 and March 1999. A statistician randomly assigned the prospective mothers to either a prayer group (100 women) or a non-prayer group (99). Besides the women, the physicians and medical personnel caring for the women did not know a study of prayer was ongoing.

The people praying for the women lived in the United States, Canada, and Australia and were incapable of knowing or contacting the women undergoing the procedures. Which women were in which group was not revealed until the pregnancy data became available at the completion of the study. The people praying were from Christian denominations and were separated into three groups. One group received pictures of the women and prayed for an increase in their pregnancy rate. Another group prayed to improve the effectiveness of the first group. A third group prayed for the two other groups. Anecdotal evidence from other prayer research has found this method to be most effective. The three groups began to pray within five days of the initial hormone treatment that stimulates egg development and continued to pray for three weeks.

Besides finding a higher pregnancy rate among the women who had a group praying for them, the researchers found older women seemed to benefit more from prayer. For women between 30 and 39, the pregnancy rate for the prayer group was 51 percent, compared with 23 percent for the non-prayer group.

The researchers analyzed their data several ways to see if they could find other variables that would have accounted for the differences between the two groups. However, no adjustments altered the results. The group will continue to study whether its findings are genuine and, if so, what mechanisms might be at work.

Other studies have shown that prayer seems to exert a benefit for heart patients. The researchers believe theirs is the first study looking at prayer and infertility.


###
None of the researchers are employed by religious organizations and were not asked by religious groups to perform the study. Dr. Kwang Y. Cha, director of the Cha Hospital and an associate research scientist at OB/GYN at Columbia University College of Physicians & Surgeons, funded the research through his hospital.
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2001-09/cuco-pmi092801.php




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Power of Prayer in Medicine
People Who Are Prayed for Fare Better
By Jeanie Davis

Nov. 6, 2001 -- Here's more evidence that -- in medicine, as in all of life -- prayer seems to work in mysterious ways.

In one recent study, women at an in vitro fertilization clinic had higher pregnancy rates when total strangers were praying for them. Another study finds that people undergoing risky cardiovascular surgery have fewer complications when they are the focus of prayer groups.

The fertilization study -- conducted at a hospital in Seoul, Korea -- found a doubling of the pregnancy rate among women who were prayed for, says Rogerio A. Lobo, MD, chair of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Columbia University School of Medicine in New York City. His study appears in the September issue of the Journal of Reproductive Medicine.

"It's a highly-significant finding," Lobo tells WebMD. "I'm first to say we don't know what this means."

The randomized study involved 199 women who were undergoing in vitro fertility treatments at a hospital in Seoul, Korea, during 1998 and 1999. All women were selected for the study based on their similar age and fertility factors, Lobo tells WebMD.

Half the women were randomly assigned to have one of several Christian prayer groups in the U.S., Canada, and Australia pray for them. A photograph of each patient was given to "her" prayer group. While one set of prayer groups prayed directly for the women, a second set of prayer groups prayed for the first set, and a third group prayed for both groups.

Neither the women nor their medical caregivers knew about the study -- or that anyone was praying for them.

"We were very careful to control this as rigorously as we could," Lobo tells WebMD. "We deliberately set it up in an unbiased way." That meant not informing patients they were being prayed for, so it would not influence the women's outcome. Whether the patients were praying for themselves -- or if others were praying for them -- "we don't know," he says.

The women in the "prayed for" group became pregnant twice as often as the other women, he says.

"We were not expecting to find a positive result," says Lobo. Researchers have re-analyzed the data several times, to detect any discrepancies -- but have been unable to find any, he says.

Lobo admits there may be some "biological variable" that they have not discovered, which could account for the high success rate among the prayed-for women. He and his colleagues are already planning a follow-up study also involving in vitro fertilization.

The second study involves 150 patients -- all having serious heart problems, all scheduled for a procedure called angioplasty, in which doctors thread a catheter up into a clogged heart artery, open it up, and insert a little device called a stent to prop it open.

Patients who were prayed for during their procedure had far fewer complications, reports lead author Mitchell W. Krucoff, MD, director of the Ischemia Monitoring Laboratory at Duke University Medical Center and the Durham Veterans Administration Medical Center in Durham, NC.

His study appears in the current issue of the American Heart Journal.

Krucoff enrolled 150 patients who were going to have the stent procedure, and then randomly assigned them to receive one of five complementary therapies: guided imagery, stress relaxation, healing touch, or intercessory 'off site' prayer -- which meant they were prayed for by others, or to no complementary therapy.

All the complementary therapies -- except off-site prayer -- were performed at the patient's bedside at least one hour before the cardiac procedures.

Seven prayer groups of varying denominations around the world -- Buddhists, Catholics, Moravians, Jews, fundamentalist Christians, Baptists, and the Unity School of Christianity -- prayed for specific patients during their procedures.

Each prayer group was assigned names, ages, and illnesses of specific patients they were to pray for. None of the patients, family members, or staff knew who was being prayed for. None of the patient-prayer group matchings were based on denomination.

"This was a very rigorously controlled study, just as we would look at any therapeutic -- a new cardiovascular drug, a new stent -- and see the results in terms of patients' outcomes," Krucoff tells WebMD. The goal was to determine which therapies warranted further study in a bigger trial.

Those in the "prayed for" group had fewer complications than any of the patients, including those receiving other complementary therapies, he says. "Although it's not statistical proof, it's not certainty, it is suggestive -- to the point that we've already begun a phase II trial."

He has already enrolled more than 300 people in a phase II study.

Why did prayer produce the best outcome? "There are no satisfactory mechanistic explanations," he says. That's why studies that measure patients' outcomes are best for this kind of study, he says. Even if you don't understand why it's happening, at least you have something to measure -- how the patient did."

Both studies are "well-controlled," preliminary trials "providing more evidence that there's something to it all," says Blair Justice, PhD, professor of psychology and psychobiologist (mind-body medicine) at the University of Texas School of Public Health in Houston.

Justice, who has followed prayer research for several decades, reviewed the reports for WebMD.

"Research into prayer has been going on a lot longer than is reflected in mainstream journals," Justice tells WebMD. "Since the 1980s, there have been several well-controlled prospective studies, good evidence that this wasn't some product of a good imagination."

Some of the studies conducted in Europe involved nonhuman organisms -- enzyme cells, bacteria, plants, animals -- which could not be affected by other complicating factors, including faith. Groups were assigned to pray for their growth; then the prayers were reversed, and people were praying against growth. Each time, the plants responded according to the focus of the prayers.

"There seems to be something to it," he says.

While current technology does not allow researchers to understand the mechanism behind prayer -- what makes it work -- it's much like gravity and other natural phenomena that were considered mysterious forces by earlier cultures, Justice tells WebMD.

"Keppler was accused of being insane when he said tides were due to the tug of lunar gravity, even Galileo considered it to be ravings of a lunatic -- until Marconi proved the theory," he says.

"It's just like anything else, you don't have to believe in it for prayer to have an effect," says Justice.

[scrogdog]

Very interesting stuff, Class. Thanks!

I'll probably end up looking a bit further in to this at some point.

It's also intersting from the perspective of positive thinking. I have been an advocate of positive thinking for many years.

"There is only do or not do. There is no try"

As far as I am concerned, when I tell someone "I'll try", that means "I have no faith in myself to get this done". Because if I did, I would instead say "Sure! I can do that! When do you need it"?

It is also interesting from the perspective of the stories we have all heard I am sure of regular people doing superhuman things under stress. Lifting cars off of loved ones and things like that.

Man really is an amazing machine! :)

[k-fridge]

Man really is an amazing machine!

Women have told me that for years......



:D

[yelram]

For example?



Oh? How so?



Sorry to answer a question with a question, but what do you think the situation was that caused the term "mass hysteria" to be coined? Have we seen any example of this phenomena over time? Why is it, do you think, that there are sucessful con artists? Should we as humans accept all we see at face vailue?
Ummm the Trojan war? Jericho? That Khufu built the great pyramid, or that the original pyramids were built as tombs (not the lack-luster, later ones, which were obviously later attempts to recreate the great pyramids)There are many many many more, just go look it up. The assumption that historical writings are just fairytales has done more bad than good in archeology.

So if someone found the writings of some computer guru 2000 years from now, and lets assume civilization has fallen apart, and been rebuilt back up by that time, what do you think people would assume the meaning is if they never saw a computer? Or how about a history book for more relevance. Do you think characters like Hitler, or Stalin, would be seen as "real" or just characters in some "ancient" persons fictitious ramblings? What would a person who believes man is incapable of air travel would make of "ancient","less inteligent", civilization claiming that their leaders could fly up to the heavens. Or that they lived for over 1000 years? They would just assume that these people were making it up. WHY? Because they OBVIOUSLY arent as SUPER SMART (Homo sapien sapien sapien) as we are. So they must not have meant anything seriously. I would think the scientific method would assume that these people were telling the truth, and try to DISPROVE them, not make up a plausible explanation for why they made it up.

[bootlen]

Thanks, Bro. I read this a number of years ago but could not remember where.

You da man!