I apologise if this has been posted before, but here is an interesting report
in New Scientist of a double-blind experiment which showed that heart
patients who were prayed for did better.
This has also been posted to the Web at:
http://archinte.ama-assn.org/issues/v159n19/full/io190043.html
and
http://www.kcstar.com/item/pages/home.pat,local/3773f35d.a24,.html
I personally am sceptical that God participates in scientific experiments to
`prove' to scientists that He exists, but nevertheless it adds to a growing
body of scientific evidence that supports the reality of a non-material
spiritual world.
The so-called sceptics response shows that no amount of evidence would
convince them that materialism is false.
Steve
==================================================
http://www.newscientist.com/ns/19991113/newsstory13.html
New Scientist
NEWS 13/11/99
[...]
Heart patients fared better when strangers prayed
PRAYERS CAN HELP patients recover even when they don't know that
people are praying for them, says a provocative new study. Sceptics are far
from convinced, however. They say that while this attempt to probe the
healing powers of prayer was better designed than previous studies, it was still
flawed.
Although most research into prayer has found no effect, one study of four
hundred heart patients in 1988 did suggest a positive outcome. But William
Harris of Saint Luke's Hospital in Kansas City, Missouri, felt that this study
was potentially flawed, since both doctors and their patients knew a study was
in progress--although no one knew which patients received prayer. So Harris
designed a similar study, in which both doctors and patients were kept in the
dark.
Harris and his colleagues secretly enrolled patients who came to the hospital's
coronary care unit over 12 months. They left out patients having heart
transplants, as well as people who stayed less than 24 hours, since it took a
day to arrange for the prayers. All new patients routinely get a medical record
number in sequential order, and the hospital chaplain's secretary would call a
volunteer Christian prayer group and give them the first name of any patient
with an even number. The volunteers then prayed for the person daily for four
weeks. Odd-numbered patients served as controls.
To assess patients' overall recovery, the researchers devised a scoring system
on the basis of variables like fever and whether they were being treated with
antibiotics. They say the scoring system is consistent enough for ten doctors
who scored eleven patients to reach 96 per cent agreement. Based on this
system, the 466 patients in the group who were prayed for had a significantly
better outcome than the 524 patients who received no prayer.
Harris believes his study is as rigorous as most drugs trials. And it has gained a
stamp of approval by appearing in a journal published by the American
Medical Association. "How open or closed your mind is doesn't make much
difference if you design it right," says Harris. "If people are willing to accept
the outcome of a drug study like this, they have to accept this one too."
"It's better than the previous studies, but there are still some issues," says
Herbert Benson, a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School. But he
notes that no other researchers have validated the scoring system, and
questions the way patients were divided into the two groups. Any ordered
system, such as Harris's odd and even medical record numbers, raises the
possibility of bias should the secrecy surrounding the trial break down.
Paul Kurz, who chairs the Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims
of the Paranormal in Amherst, New York, believes the next step should be to
conduct a similar study in collaboration with members of a sceptical
organisation such as his own. "We would be pleased to provide research
work," he says. "It has to be a very, very tight protocol.
(Source: Archives of Internal Medicine (vol 159, p 2273)
Nell Boyce, Washington DC
[...]
(c) Copyright New Scientist, RBI Limited 1999
==================================================
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen E. (Steve) Jones ,--_|\ Email: sejones@iinet.net.au
3 Hawker Avenue / Oz \ Web: http://www.iinet.net.au/~sejones
Warwick 6024 -> *_,--\_/ Phone: +61 8 9448 7439
Perth, Western Australia v "Test everything." (1 Thess. 5:21)
--------------------------------------------------------------------