Christians. Could you be wrong?

[Cyberman]

Which is also not supported by the article he cited. False equivocation is false.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Which is also not supported by the article he cited. False equivocation is false.

Well, there is one get out clause. He could, in a roundabout way, be trying to prove that faith healing is not a result of the influence of a god or gods.

[Cyberman]

Well there's certainly not been a shred of evidence for any gods so far, that's for sure. He's still trying to equate faith in a medical treatment, however genuine, with blind faith in general. He's building a case for mind over matter in a literal sense.

[Huggy Bear]

Which is also not supported by the article he cited. False equivocation is false.

Well, there is one get out clause. He could, in a roundabout way, be trying to prove that faith healing is not a result of the influence of a god or gods.

once again for your benefit, since you apparently didn't see what I posted.

Back on page 3 of this thread I made this clear from the beginning.

Also as a side note, faith has nothing to do with religion, anyone is capable of having faith, as documented by the "placebo effect".

[Cyberman]

Faith as in a reasonable expectation that a drug treatment is going to work is not even close to faith in - well, what, exactly? What is the point you're trying to make? If you made it, I clearly missed it.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Well, there is one get out clause. He could, in a roundabout way, be trying to prove that faith healing is not a result of the influence of a god or gods.

once again for your benefit, since you apparently didn't see what I posted.

Back on page 3 of this thread I made this clear from the beginning.

Also as a side note, faith has nothing to do with religion, anyone is capable of having faith, as documented by the "placebo effect".

I did see it numbnuts. So, are you really going to tell us that your entire reason for being on this thread is to just reiterate what a placebo is but write about in such a way as to subtly indicate that god is the cause but to squirm away when questioned on it?

Yes, what is the point here? Please elucidate. Because currently the only conclusion that we can draw from, what, 21 pages, is that people don't fully know the mechanisms behind the efficacy of the placebo effect. You know, that conclusion that anyone even remotely aware of the placebo effect can draw.

[Bad Wolf]

I don't have faith in anything. And if it turned out I did, and you pointed that out to me, I would stop beleiving it.

[Thumpalumpacus]

---

You ask for the link to be repeated:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7BQKu0YP8Y

---

And again I quote from the Scientific American article Placebo Effect: A Cure in the Mind

http://web.as.uky.edu/statistics/users/r...oStudy.pdf

a patient’s expectations and beliefs can greatly affect the
course of an illness.

And as others have pointed out, calling the placebo effect evidence of your god's intervention is pretty weak.

I'm comfortable with my skeptical view of faith healing.

If you are comfortbale with your view of faith healing, I trust that when you get cancer you'll not attend the doctor's office? I trust that you avoid medicine when you are ill?

I mean, if you truly believe faith healing works, go with it, that's what I say.

[Huggy Bear]

once again for your benefit, since you apparently didn't see what I posted.

Back on page 3 of this thread I made this clear from the beginning.

So, are you really going to tell us that your entire reason for being on this thread is to just reiterate what a placebo is but write about in such a way as to subtly indicate that god is the cause but to squirm away when questioned on it?

Yes, what is the point here? Please elucidate. Because currently the only conclusion that we can draw from, what, 21 pages, is that people don't fully know the mechanisms behind the efficacy of the placebo effect. You know, that conclusion that anyone even remotely aware of the placebo effect can draw.

How do you figure i'm squirming away when i clearly established my position from the beginning.

My point was that faith healing was real and corroborated by scientific studies on the "placebo effect". Faith has absolutely nothing to do with God or religion but is simply defined in the bible as "the substance of things hoped for".

---

I don't have faith in anything. And if it turned out I did, and you pointed that out to me, I would stop beleiving it.

Let me ask you something, do you own a car?

---

once again for your benefit, since you apparently didn't see what I posted.

Back on page 3 of this thread I made this clear from the beginning.

I did see it numbnuts. So, are you really going to tell us that your entire reason for being on this thread is to just reiterate what a placebo is but write about in such a way as to subtly indicate that god is the cause but to squirm away when questioned on it?

Yes, what is the point here? Please elucidate. Because currently the only conclusion that we can draw from, what, 21 pages, is that people don't fully know the mechanisms behind the efficacy of the placebo effect. You know, that conclusion that anyone even remotely aware of the placebo effect can draw.

Did you really just edit your post, in order to call me a numbnuts? lol

[Fidel_Castronaut]

So, are you really going to tell us that your entire reason for being on this thread is to just reiterate what a placebo is but write about in such a way as to subtly indicate that god is the cause but to squirm away when questioned on it?

Yes, what is the point here? Please elucidate. Because currently the only conclusion that we can draw from, what, 21 pages, is that people don't fully know the mechanisms behind the efficacy of the placebo effect. You know, that conclusion that anyone even remotely aware of the placebo effect can draw.

How do you figure i'm squirming away when i clearly established my position from the beginning.

My point was that faith healing was real and corroborated by scientific studies on the "placebo effect". Faith has absolutely nothing to do with God or religion but is simply defined in the bible as "the substance of things hoped for".

So how do you explain nocebos occurring during placebo studies? Or the reverse?

Placebos are not a defined mechanism whereby the wishes of the patient are automatically translated into a regression of symptoms or indeed a 'cure'. Indeed, as I've already stated to you and you ignored, the presence of a placebo in the absence of a physical active ingredient that causes the hypothesised effect is actually evidence of no physical effect. That's why double blind studies are conducted.

---

Did you really just edit your post, in order to call me a numbnuts? lol

I realised I hadn't represented reality to my full knowledge in the post cited, yes.