(May 18, 2016 at 12:57 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(May 18, 2016 at 12:36 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote: The Placebo Effect is what happens when a person thinks they're getting medicine, but in reality nothing is happening.

However, due to their brain's reaction to the "good news" of the cure they're getting, they produce fewer stress hormones and their immune system's reaction improves. They are thus "cured" (or improved) by absolutely nothing other than their own natural processes.

Nice explanation attempt but as the article I posted states "Scientists recognize that there are placebo effects but have trouble accounting for them.". would you mind posting your source that contradicts that statement?

You're talking about the dude's opinion piece in Psychology Today, the magazine?

Okay. I'll just skip around the fact that the dude offered no hard science, only the vague statement "have trouble accounting for them" (I'll get to that in a minute) and a couple of anecdotes, for his claim. I would agree with him that science "has trouble accounting for" faith healing.

What does it mean to "account for" something, in science? It means you propose a suspected mechanism, you eliminate all the variables which may contaminate your results, and you run a control group and an experimental group in order to test your hypothesis.

How would one do that, exactly, with "faith healing"? However, they are trying to nail down a definition of both, and to study the phenomenon. I'll give you a hint: no one is thinking that faith-healing is magical.

Here's a scientific article, with references, from the National Institutes of Health, if you want to have a fuller explanation of what exactly we do know, don't know, and why your Psychology Today sound-bite and your/his bizarre conclusions from it are worthless.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2814126/

Sorry I took so long to reply. I had work to do, this afternoon, which took me away from the computer.

(May 18, 2016 at 6:45 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote:

(May 18, 2016 at 12:57 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Nice explanation attempt but as the article I posted states "Scientists recognize that there are placebo effects but have trouble accounting for them.". would you mind posting your source that contradicts that statement?

You're talking about the dude's opinion piece in Psychology Today, the magazine?

The dude? You don't think that's just a little disrespectful?

Quote:Hailing from Ireland, Nigel Barber received his Ph.D. in Biopsychology from Hunter College, CUNY, and taught psychology at Bemidji State University and Birmingham Southern College.

(May 18, 2016 at 6:45 pm)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote: Okay. I'll just skip around the fact that the dude offered no hard science, only the vague statement "have trouble accounting for them" (I'll get to that in a minute) and a couple of anecdotes, for his claim. I would agree with him that science "has trouble accounting for" faith healing.

What does it mean to "account for" something, in science? It means you propose a suspected mechanism, you eliminate all the variables which may contaminate your results, and you run a control group and an experimental group in order to test your hypothesis.

How would one do that, exactly, with "faith healing"? However, they are trying to nail down a definition of both, and to study the phenomenon. I'll give you a hint: no one is thinking that faith-healing is magical.

Here's a scientific article, with references, from the National Institutes of Health, if you want to have a fuller explanation of what exactly we do know, don't know, and why your Psychology Today sound-bite and your/his bizarre conclusions from it are worthless.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2814126/

Also your article offers no explanations either hence why it refers to the placebo effect as a "phenomenon".

(May 18, 2016 at 9:31 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: The dude? You don't think that's just a little disrespectful?

Quote:Hailing from Ireland, Nigel Barber received his Ph.D. in Biopsychology from Hunter College, CUNY, and taught psychology at Bemidji State University and Birmingham Southern College.

Nope. He's a dude with a PhD. My mom's a chick with a PhD. My dad's a dude with an EngD. So what?

(May 18, 2016 at 9:31 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Also your article offers no explanations either hence why it refers to the placebo effect as a "phenomenon".

Yep. Best ignore the experts at the National Institutes of Health, when they explain why it's not yet studied (because no one can give a proper definition of what they're even talking about when they say "faith healing", just like no one can properly explain WTF they mean when they say "God") and stick to your "well nobody knows so I'll just stick to thinking whatever I want to think about it" strategy.

Experience certainly teaches me that fundamentalists can't handle any information that's not in binary, black and white terms, and trying to explain a complex situation to them just results in "Well, then nobody knows, so I'll stick with magic."

There is this guy at work who had cancer. He thanked the condiment honey for his recovery, not the doctors.

It is no different with retarded theists. God did not save your retarded ass. Doctors did.

I understand the recent trend of theists acknowledging science, and then saying "but God did it too". At least it's not denying hard evidence.

But it's still really purile. I can just say, "well my god made your God then". If it doesn't add anything of use to the explanation, you might as well omit it.

"Your god can't have made my god because my god made everything."

"He did too, your God made everything apart from my god."

"Did not."

"Did too."

(May 19, 2016 at 12:05 am)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote:

(May 18, 2016 at 9:31 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: The dude? You don't think that's just a little disrespectful?

Nope. He's a dude with a PhD. My mom's a chick with a PhD. My dad's a dude with an EngD. So what?

Don't act like you referring to him as "some dude" wasn't an attempt at marginalizing his opinion.

(May 19, 2016 at 12:05 am)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote:

(May 18, 2016 at 9:31 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Also your article offers no explanations either hence why it refers to the placebo effect as a "phenomenon".

Yep. Best ignore the experts at the National Institutes of Health, when they explain why it's not yet studied (because no one can give a proper definition of what they're even talking about when they say "faith healing", just like no one can properly explain WTF they mean when they say "God") and stick to your "well nobody knows so I'll just stick to thinking whatever I want to think about it" strategy.

Experience certainly teaches me that fundamentalists can't handle any information that's not in binary, black and white terms, and trying to explain a complex situation to them just results in "Well, then nobody knows, so I'll stick with magic."

You mean some dudes at the National Institutes of Health right?

No one is ignoring anything, science has conceded that belief is the x-factor in placebo research, how this belief translates into healing is a completely different issue.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marjorie-w...57964.html

Quote:The results of the above research and other studies lead me to the conclusion that our beliefs can have a significant effect on our health and well-being.

I probably should include the chicks credentials.

Quote:Marjorie Hines Woollacott, PhD, has been a neuroscience professor and director of the Motor Control Lab in the Institute for Neuroscience at the University of Oregon for more than three decades and a meditator for almost four.

My point is that the bible has been saying that faith can heal long before science termed the "placebo effect".

But when Jesus heard it, he answered him, saying, Fear not: believe only, and she shall be made whole. - Luke 8:50

Keep referring to me as a fundamentalist if it makes you feel better, but know this, I've stated nothing more other than one can be healed simply through belief, how it happens is irrelevant.

(May 19, 2016 at 1:35 am)Huggy74 Wrote:

(May 19, 2016 at 12:05 am)TheRocketSurgeon Wrote: Nope. He's a dude with a PhD. My mom's a chick with a PhD. My dad's a dude with an EngD. So what?

Don't act like you referring to him as "some dude" wasn't an attempt at marginalizing his opinion.

Fair enough. I've been dealing with another asshole with a PhD all day, in debunking the bullshit of an anti-trans, anti-gay activist who uses his former position at Johns Hopkins to peddle debunked, old psychological ideas which conservatives gobble up because they suit their prejudices.

The point remains, however, that no matter how well credentialed an individual writing an opinion piece is, that they're still just "some dude" with a single opinion. Unless that opinion is accompanied by references and represents the consensus of scientific understanding of the subject, then it's just some dude, no matter his position or title. (I'd also like to add, here: Oh, NOW you want to lean heavily on a PhD's opinion as definitive on a subject, after ignoring the literally hundreds of thousands of evolutionary biologists out there?)

There is zero evidence that it is faith in a magical being that is causing the healing. If you would have actually read the NIH article I cited, it goes on for pages about the various possibilities, what we do and don't know about them, and so on. The NIH article cites multiple major studies that have been done in an attempt to understand the various phenomena, and represents the scientific consensus on the subject... not the opinion of any one human being.

More importantly, you are positing a magical causation to what is undoubtedly a natural phenomenon. You say it is irrelevant how it happens, but I think the exact opposite is true. It is undoubtedly a natural occurrence because it can be replicated by known, non-magical means. You dismiss that by calling it irrelevant, as if your magical hypothesis is proved, but the dominant idea at the moment is that our endocrine system is boosted in certain circumstances that have to do with our mental state, resulting in higher immune response. There is a high biological cost in maintaining a hyped-up immune system at all times, and there are psychological conditions (such as depression) which are shown to reduce the immune response, so things which help overcome the mental states that produce the chemical levels related to depression (and other conditions that do the same, for example high stress, in which the body puts its resources into short-term survival) are undoubtedly going to be helpful, as your quotation of Dr. Woollacott's work suggests.

Faith traditions seem to provide measurable benefits to one's sense of wellness, especially in overcoming loneliness and depression (indeed, religions specifically target such people for recruitment), by giving a sense of community and belonging, which to a species which evolved in small tribal societies is almost as strong a biological imperative as eating and breathing. That does NOT mean that magic is involved. And if having faith is really no different from eating a sugar pill that I'm told will cure me (the Placebo Effect), then it's not supportive of the claims you're trying to make, or imply at least, here.

The Biblical claim to which you refer is talking about magic. Literal magic. Not the Placebo Effect. We're the ones claiming that any "cures" out there are the result of the Placebo Effect-- nothing is happening except for a couple of natural phenomena triggered by certain states of mind, and the related reaction of the endocrine and immune systems.

So you've got nothing, and you've made our case for us. Thanks!

He didn't refer to the dude as "some dude". He said "the dude ". Don't pretend that the sleight of hand misquoting wasn't an attempt at marginalising Rocket's position.

(May 19, 2016 at 12:13 am)Maelstrom Wrote: There is this guy at work who had cancer. He thanked the condiment honey for his recovery, not the doctors.

It is no different with retarded theists. God did not save your retarded ass. Doctors did.

"A guy at work bought a car out of the paper. Ten years later - Bam! Herpes."
--Peter Griffin