Coconut
Member
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2005
- Messages
- 4,663
A study, claiming prayer caused medical miracles, is in the news as its author awaits sentencing for fraud. Doctors are questioning its publication in a credible medical journal.
The study alleged that the power of prayer increased the pregnancy rates of a group of women, who were undergoing fertility treatment, by 100%. The study was done by researchers at Columbia University and was published in October 2001 in the Journal for Reproductive Health.
It was subsequently commented on in the New York Times, by Larry King and by Dr Timothy Johnson, ABC News medical editor.
Study authors 'suspect'
The three authors of the study were Kwang Cha, Rogerio Lobo and Daniel Wirth. Dr Cha has since left Columbia University and refuses to comment on the study, Dr Lobo claims not to have participated in the study itself and Daniel Wirth, who has no medical training, is currently under house arrest awaiting sentencing on several cases of fraud and impersonation.
Many people now doubt that the study, which claimed to have involved 199 Korean women undergoing in-vitro fertilisation, took place at all.
What is a concern to those in the world of science is how this study found its way into a peer-reviewed medical journal that has always been held in high esteem.
So what should the criteria for selection of articles for publication be? Should articles claiming supernatural involvement in the outcomes of studies, be considered for publication at all?
'No supernatural claim ever scientifically proved'
"It must be emphasised that, in the entire history of modern science, no claim of any type of supernatural phenomena has ever been replicated under strictly controlled conditions. The importance of this fact cannot be overstated. One would think that all medical journal editors would be keenly aware of this fact and therefore be highly skeptical of paranormal or supernatural claims," writes Bruce Flamm, clinical professor of obstetrics and gynaecology at the University of California in the Skeptical Inquirer magazine, September 2004.
Can prayer bring about healing? Is faith more efficient than antibiotics? These debates are not new and have now hit the headlines again.
"While few would doubt the calming, placebo or meditative effects prayer can have on patients, the scientific community should become a more active and vocal advocate of rationality," writes Gil Gaudia, professor emeritus from the State University of New York on the website [edited by Yeshua no LINKS are to be posted without Chad's permission]. "It's time to start a scientific movement against superstition in all forms, and that includes religion, especially in medicine."
(Susan Erasmus, Health24)
hmmm....
The study alleged that the power of prayer increased the pregnancy rates of a group of women, who were undergoing fertility treatment, by 100%. The study was done by researchers at Columbia University and was published in October 2001 in the Journal for Reproductive Health.
It was subsequently commented on in the New York Times, by Larry King and by Dr Timothy Johnson, ABC News medical editor.
Study authors 'suspect'
The three authors of the study were Kwang Cha, Rogerio Lobo and Daniel Wirth. Dr Cha has since left Columbia University and refuses to comment on the study, Dr Lobo claims not to have participated in the study itself and Daniel Wirth, who has no medical training, is currently under house arrest awaiting sentencing on several cases of fraud and impersonation.
Many people now doubt that the study, which claimed to have involved 199 Korean women undergoing in-vitro fertilisation, took place at all.
What is a concern to those in the world of science is how this study found its way into a peer-reviewed medical journal that has always been held in high esteem.
So what should the criteria for selection of articles for publication be? Should articles claiming supernatural involvement in the outcomes of studies, be considered for publication at all?
'No supernatural claim ever scientifically proved'
"It must be emphasised that, in the entire history of modern science, no claim of any type of supernatural phenomena has ever been replicated under strictly controlled conditions. The importance of this fact cannot be overstated. One would think that all medical journal editors would be keenly aware of this fact and therefore be highly skeptical of paranormal or supernatural claims," writes Bruce Flamm, clinical professor of obstetrics and gynaecology at the University of California in the Skeptical Inquirer magazine, September 2004.
Can prayer bring about healing? Is faith more efficient than antibiotics? These debates are not new and have now hit the headlines again.
"While few would doubt the calming, placebo or meditative effects prayer can have on patients, the scientific community should become a more active and vocal advocate of rationality," writes Gil Gaudia, professor emeritus from the State University of New York on the website [edited by Yeshua no LINKS are to be posted without Chad's permission]. "It's time to start a scientific movement against superstition in all forms, and that includes religion, especially in medicine."
(Susan Erasmus, Health24)
hmmm....
Last edited by a moderator:
