Study finds that prayer does not heal the sick

MobBoss said:
No...it only proves you right under the conditions tested. Once again, biblically, a common prayer practice is to "lay on hands" of those sick or ill when praying for them. Touch is often associated with healing prayer. This was not tested in any way in this study.
what yadda yadda! Since when is any other way of praying suddenly not praying?


sorry, but it seems to me you are simply making the absurdedst claims to back up a theory or yours that got gunned down for good. Bring proper evidence and we talk, keep throwing mud, making weird claims that are based on your twisted personal misinterpretation of the bible and keep fighting over semantics and I won't listen.

Why don't you bring any proof, hu?


Because there is none :lol:
 
MobBoss said:
Its amazing as a scientist you are all about corroborating fact and evidence, then you seem to want to toss all that out and treat a single study, which didnt really go very far to study the phenomenon at all, as ultimate gospel. A single study is exactly that...a single and quite limited study into the issue. No more, no less.
again: show where it was wrong, willya? You doubt it, you prove it wrong. That's, after all, what happened to the korean.

Why dont you Mr. Scientist? All you have read is the same linked story we all have.....this is neither in your field or even remotely associated with it, so get off your soapbox. Have you studied it to see if it was set up properly yourself? Nope. Do you know anything regarding the religious groups involved to pray for people...what denominations they were what they believe? No.
Again, MobBoss makes assumptions that are based on what? thin air :lol:

In fact, you dont know anything about religion at all, so how are you qualified in any way to ascertain that they people praying for those heart patients were in any way gifted in that area? Answer: You dont.

:rotfl: now this gets really absurd: you say that since those people may have been too dumb to pray properly this makes the proof that their form of prayer is not working false? And that proper prayer does help?

Come on, get your brain into gear! You make a claim, you prove it. Show how they were inept!

What I suggest and any REASONABLE scientist would as well, is that more study needs to be done on the issue with more types of control groups and circumstances. As I have stated previously, people praying from afar, inpersonal and unseen, rarely have any effect regardless...most christians would tell you that...however, praying for someone in person, laying hands upon them is another matter, one not tested in any way in this study.
Now the paralegal (the non-expert at science) tells the scintific community how they know nothing about science? :lol:

Lets see....are you an expert on religion? Nope. What rediculous claim have I ever made?
You claimed that prayer healing requires touch.
Please state my personal views on medicine and science...I have a daughter undergoing surgery on the 12th of April, so please let me know how wacko I am for letting her have surgery. Sheesh. For a scientist, your mind is about as closed as anyone I have ever seen. What ever happened to keeping an open mind about things you dont know about?
Good luck to your daughter! I hope all goes well!

You are not a whacko for letting her undergo surgery, you'd be a whacko to think that a prayer helps her. What may really help her is if your interaction with her shows her how you care for her - and that can be done in the form of prayer if you so choose. But that is a psychological help, not a medical one, and not one acted out by any god. I hope you find the right way to help her!

Once again, my "interpretation" of science isnt any different than anyone elses. God gave us brains in order to figure stuff out - nothing wrong with that. People who ignore science are fools. But as of yet, science has not answered all the questions that there are in the universe. Not even close.
oh but it is quite different - you refuse proof, refuse to bring evidence the proof may be wrong, thus you refuse the basic principles of science.
 
carlosMM said:
what yadda yadda! Since when is any other way of praying suddenly not praying?

You know. I am starting to seriously doubt your being a scientist at all. You certainly dont seem to think and talk like one.

sorry, but it seems to me you are simply making the absurdedst claims to back up a theory or yours that got gunned down for good. Bring proper evidence and we talk, keep throwing mud, making weird claims that are based on your twisted personal misinterpretation of the bible and keep fighting over semantics and I won't listen.

I am talking about tests under a variety of conditions not done in the current study. Why do you seem to have problems with that?
Why don't you bring any proof, hu?


Spoken like a true scientist....not.:rolleyes:
 
Well, another waste of money that could have been better spent.

And any fool (I would put another word in, but I won't) with even a remote fraction of a brain could have come to this conclusion.
 
carlosMM said:
again: show where it was wrong, willya? You doubt it, you prove it wrong. That's, after all, what happened to the korean.

I am not discounting the study. But was it difinitive? No.

Again, MobBoss makes assumptions that are based on what? thin air :lol:

Not at all. The study shows what is shows. What this thread is showing it most likely you arent a scientist at all by the way you act and treat the results of a single study. You act more like a little kid to be honest.

:rotfl: now this gets really absurd: you say that since those people may have been too dumb to pray properly this makes the proof that their form of prayer is not working false? And that proper prayer does help?

I am saying the study didnt allow for types/forms of prayer biblically mentioned to heal others. Also, I highly doubt prayer from an individual as sarcastic as you would have any effect on anybody.:rolleyes: Its not that they are too dumb, but prayer is an issue of the heart, something with which you have no idea about.

Come on, get your brain into gear! You make a claim, you prove it. Show how they were inept!

I say that I currently dont know what they qualifications were as intercessors.

Now the paralegal (the non-expert at science) tells the scintific community how they know nothing about science? :lol:

First of all your sarcasm is typically of little playground kids rather than a scientist. And this study is about religion and prayer, which compared to you, I am a subject matter expert.

You claimed that prayer healing requires touch.

Try reading the bible. Read how Christ healed the sick. Did he touch them? Why yes he did. I am not claiming anything, except maybe if we are going to truly study prayer, we should study it in the correct context. Why do you have a problem with that?

You are not a whacko for letting her undergo surgery, you'd be a whacko to think that a prayer helps her. What may really help her is if your interaction with her shows her how you care for her - and that can be done in the form of prayer if you so choose. But that is a psychological help, not a medical one, and not one acted out by any god. I hope you find the right way to help her!

I do believe that prayer does indeed help people. But, just like in the study, praying for someone I dont know, impersonally from a distance away, has never worked for me either.

oh but it is quite different - you refuse proof, refuse to bring evidence the proof may be wrong, thus you refuse the basic principles of science.

Sorry, but I am not refusing proof at all. Your allegation against me is false. But what I am doing is showing questions that this study did not answer as it was incomplete. Nothing more, nothing less.
 
MobBoss said:
You know. I am starting to seriously doubt your being a scientist at all. You certainly dont seem to think and talk like one.



I am talking about tests under a variety of conditions not done in the current study. Why do you seem to have problems with that?
[/B]

Spoken like a true scientist....not.:rolleyes:
see, there'S THE RUB: they tested the setup that many christians claim works. No work.

You use the fact that otehr setups are possible to make a general claim that 'it works'.


Nonsense.

Also, you throw in some personal attacks to make yourself seem strong - indication that you know you are talking through your rectum. Cut it out. Your precious Christianity is screwed up in many ways, just as everything in RL is. You try to defend it as holy and perfect, though you should be too old, experienced and smart. Sad.
 
MobBoss said:
I am not discounting the study. But was it difinitive? No.



Not at all. The study shows what is shows. What this thread is showing it most likely you arent a scientist at all by the way you act and treat the results of a single study. You act more like a little kid to be honest.



I am saying the study didnt allow for types/forms of prayer biblically mentioned to heal others. Also, I highly doubt prayer from an individual as sarcastic as you would have any effect on anybody.:rolleyes: Its not that they are too dumb, but prayer is an issue of the heart, something with which you have no idea about.



I say that I currently dont know what they qualifications were as intercessors.



First of all your sarcasm is typically of little playground kids rather than a scientist. And this study is about religion and prayer, which compared to you, I am a subject matter expert.



Try reading the bible. Read how Christ healed the sick. Did he touch them? Why yes he did. I am not claiming anything, except maybe if we are going to truly study prayer, we should study it in the correct context. Why do you have a problem with that?



I do believe that prayer does indeed help people. But, just like in the study, praying for someone I dont know, impersonally from a distance away, has never worked for me either.



Sorry, but I am not refusing proof at all. Your allegation against me is false. But what I am doing is showing questions that this study did not answer as it was incomplete. Nothing more, nothing less.


another long post attackng me personally and trying to hide the fact that you were OFF THE TOPIC OF THIS THREAD in yoru intital posts and with your claims. :rolleyes:


get it: people are too smart to fall for that!
 
Bill3000 said:
Link
Not suprising. Probably going to be a lot of excuses similar to those done by psychics and other forms of pseudoscience to "refute" this study. I don't see why prayer should not work when it is being observed scientifically.

Besides, the power of science does not work on the strong willed. People will still pray to heal regardless of the fact if they know that it does not actually do anything. I don't have a problem with that, though; what I do have a problem is with people who would believe that prayer would actually heal, and that it cannot be scientifically observed. It's called correlation, people.

I find it highly doubtful that such a study could actually be conducted.
 
sorry, Rik!


Now, MobBoss: which part do you disagree with:

a study showed that praying for people who are sick doesn't help - it amy actually harm them. This study used one way of prayer (non-touch), which is the type of prayer usually advoacted by those who preach in church and ask the congregation to 'pray for the sick'.

You claim that this is the wrong method, but you refuse to bring any proof that your way is actually different in results. Your argumentation parallels that of the people who's way of praying for the sick was tested - you claim personal experience with results beyond pure chance.

Thus, I place the burden of proof with you: show how praying for the sick helps.
 
"Study finds that prayer does not heal the sick"

next someone will tell me its impossible to turn water into wine or to walk on water... :shake:

cant belive this "discussion" has been going on so long...
listen, religious people who prefer to pray instead of going to the doctor (modern medicin) have all the support from me.

sounds like a good idea, good luck! :)
 
I was thinking of a list of miracles that modern science and medicine can perform. Bringing someone back from 33AD 'clinical death' is stupidly easy these days. Curing leprosy has been done. Curing madness is still at the teeter stage. Walking on water is no problem (barefoot, though, would be hard). Blindness and deafness has been beaten for awhile.

It's the 'water into wine' that's giving me trouble. You could do it with fusion, I'm sure - but we're nowhere near that level of fusion at all.

CarlossMM: what if the congregation 'charges up' the person who will then go deliver the prayer 'charge' to the person in the hospital, via touch?

Mobboss: Honestly, if the study came back showing definitive improvement due to anonymous prayer - wouldn't you be crowing about it?
 
El_M: 'charge up' - with what?

this is just another claim that has never in any way been substanciated, same as the many millions of claims that god(s) exist(s). it is pure and utter nonsense, has no scientific backing whatsoever, and is solely a way of mentally enslaving people. Opiate for the people :lol:
 
CarlosMM said:
God will let people suffer to avoid scientific tests.
As a Christian I'm actually going to agree with that. And what do we learn? Don't try and test God.
 
carlosMM said:
a study showed that praying for people who are sick doesn't help - it amy actually harm them. This study used one way of prayer (non-touch), which is the type of prayer usually advoacted by those who preach in church and ask the congregation to 'pray for the sick'.

wrong, it didn't show that praying harmed the person. It's showed a correlation between patients prayed for and a less likely chance that they would recover (compared to those not prayed for). I'd guess that this would be due to one inclination to pray in more severe cases (where the outcome is more likely to be fatal) than in lighter cases.

If you wish to "prove" in this way that prayer works, just conduct a study where the people who undergo the most baisc, safe and rutine surgery gets prayed for and the others don't... suddenly (shockingly) praying increases your chance of survival!
 
Prayer can be harmful, and it can be helpful...here's why.

The first scenario is one where the person knows people are praying for him or her. That person takes that to mean that people care enough about them that they would take the time out of their busy day to pray for them. It's the support mechanism. People who feel they have support, and realize that maybe they will get better, have a higher tendency and more of a will to heal. It may not be proven scientific fact, but the will to want to go on and live is very important.

The second scenario I see is one where the person knows that people are praying for them, and just believe that God or whomever will heal them without them having to do much work. In other words, they expect everything to be okay because God and all those prayers are on their side. These people tend not to work as hard or as strenuous, and maybe do have a higher mortality rate.
 
superisis said:
wrong, it didn't show that praying harmed the person. It's showed a correlation between patients prayed for and a less likely chance that they would recover (compared to those not prayed for). I'd guess that this would be due to one inclination to pray in more severe cases (where the outcome is more likely to be fatal) than in lighter cases.
Hey, whaddayawant? I am just using the logic used by certain Christians in this thread and turning it 180°



(well done, you spotted it :thumbsup: )
 
carlosMM said:
see, there'S THE RUB: they tested the setup that many christians claim works. No work.

You use the fact that otehr setups are possible to make a general claim that 'it works'.

Personally, I have never made any such claim as to have healed anyone via long distance prayer. Perhaps prior to polling said christians they should have used biblical text and practice to study it instead of "what some christians think".

If one is going to refer to the bible as the general manner on how to pray and live ones life, shouldnt it be refered to in order to how to pray effectively?

Makes sense to me.

Also, you throw in some personal attacks to make yourself seem strong -

Lets get one thing straight. YOU were the one who came in with the "nutcase" laguange. YOU were the one that started personal attacks and continue to do so. Please check your own behavior and language before pointing any finger at me thank-you-very-much...kthxbye.

indication that you know you are talking through your rectum. Cut it out. Your precious Christianity is screwed up in many ways, just as everything in RL is. You try to defend it as holy and perfect, though you should be too old, experienced and smart. Sad.

Sounds to me like your desire to discredit christianity has overridden the logic centers of your brain. Just look at the language you use. Is it rational? Nope. How about we try to discuss this as adults and leave out the "precious rectum" type of language shall we?

@Rik: I am most certainly not trying to be flaming in this thread - but when I get stuff like this thrown at me, the temptation to be is rather hard.:lol:
 
Top Bottom