JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for PHYSIO Archives


PHYSIO Archives

PHYSIO Archives


PHYSIO@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

PHYSIO Home

PHYSIO Home

PHYSIO  July 2000

PHYSIO July 2000

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: THERAPEUTIC OCCULTISM (long)

From:

"Paul Sumner" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Wed, 05 Jul 2000 16:02:58 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (339 lines)

Many thanks for bringing up a very interesting and what I would consider a very important subject for the medical profession
I believe strongly that the recent acceptance by the medical world that our dualistic approach to medical conditions has been leaving out an important component to illness, that being the mind. Now very much embraced in the treatment of chronic/acute  pain in the uk(csag etc). However, what about the spiritual component of illness. This gets us into scary ground. Can science prove or disprove this very important component/cause of mental and physical problems?
Things that arise in the sensory experience, or that are analized by the intellect, may be able to be demonstrated. But spiritual issues that pass beyond the scope of the physical senses, which we have not settled by our own understanding, surely still need to be acknowledged. For those that embrace that spiritual component they start out by belief only, faith and as that faith builds so I believe it becomes sight.
To be truely holistic one needs to embrace mind, body & spirit.
I would also add that if one is using "energy" techniques to question where the spiritual source is coming from.
Mel, with regards to your Gurus "God resists the proud but gives grace to the humble"

PAUL SUMNER UK

>>> Barrett Dorko <[log in to unmask]> 07/02/00 05:01PM >>>
Mel,

As always, I appreciate your thoughtful post and agree that the shift in 
our profession is an indication of something much deeper than our 
educational system.

Two things: Posts like this rarely generate any in defense from the 
community mentioned, and I'd like to see some of that. And, a similar essay 
about the effects of postmodernism and its manifestation is now at the top 
of my web site for those of you who didn't see it posted on PTHER. It's 
entitled "What Went Wrong."

Barrett L. Dorko, P.T.
<http://barrettdorko.com>



At 05:17 AM 7/2/00 -0400, you wrote:
>POSTMODERNISM & THERAPEUTIC OCCULTISM
>
>The popularity of alternative therapy now probably has reached a level
>rivalling that of medieval or primitive times.  While this phenomenon has a
>great deal to do with the gullibility of humans and the successful invocation
>of the placebo effect, the medical and pharmacological professions also have
>a great deal to do with its modern  rise to eminence.  The latter, in setting
>themselves up as the demigods on all therapeutic matters, created great
>expectations among the public, who naturally expected consistent healing
>miracles to emerge from their kingdoms of health and happiness.
>
>PROBLEMS IN THE MEDICAL WORLD
>
>Instead, the spectacular general advances in medical science, surgery and
>technology have been matched almost every step of the way by an increased
>awareness that the world of  medicine is rife with iatrogenic illness and
>death; lack of understanding of some of the simplest of disorders, vast
>commercial exploitation of the sick by doctors, drug companies and insurance
>companies; unwillingness of many medical professionals to admit their
>inadequacies; proliferations on endlessly contradictory theories of major
>diseases (such as heart disease and cancer); the carrying out of many
>unnecessary procedures (such as Caesarian sections and appendectomies) and
>the dubious management of mental disorders.
>
>While one can appreciate that every discipline is replete with imperfections
>and incompleteness, the medical profession, in setting itself up as a virtual
>messiah of healing has created a situation in which the public eventually had
>to question the messiahs.  The medical profession generally has closed ranks
>on itself and its pharmacological partners instead of encouraging a
>*glasnost* or openness that would have welcomed the involvement of concerned
>members of the public.  Often the twin-pronged fork of litigation has been
>responsible for this closed-door management of medicine and pharmacology, so,
>just as companies like General Dynamics have been loath to admit errors in
>their aerospace products, the medical professionals have also been corralled
>into a similar box.
>
>Consequently, public suspicion and dissatisfaction has led to fairly
>widespread, but often unfair, distrust of the medical profession, which has
>done little to address the sociopolitical, psychological and anthropological
>issues which are leading to an increased reliance on alternative therapies.
>The fact that increasing numbers of the medical professions themselves are
>also turning to alternative therapies reveal that the medical edifice itself
>is aware of a  need for repair.
>
>PROBLEMS IN THE EDUCATIONAL WORLD
>
>Part of the blame also needs to be laid on our educational systems which
>place inadequate emphasis on science education, the scientific method,
>linguistic analysis and critical thinking, in general.  This is revealed in
>the USA by studies which show that science, mathematics and language
>standards have dropped dramatically over the past few decades.  Scientists
>all too often are regarded like specially gifted or genetically endowed
>creatures who really are something different from the average person.
>Science thus tends to become the calling of some sort of earth-based alien
>elite, certainly not something for everyone.
>
>As a result, advertising, marketing and pseudoscience rarely are questioned,
>and personal testimonials, misinterpreted reports based on science releases
>by Reuter, and TV infomercial claims come to be accepted as accurate.
>Methods developed by public figureheads or therapeutic experts come to be
>proliferated more because of the hero status of their creators than their
>underlying science (e.g. Maitland, McKenzie, McConnell, Bobath).
>
>PROBLEMS IN ALTERNATIVE THERAPY
>
>Many alternative therapists tend to categorise most allopathic medicine or at
>best tolerate it for major surgical reasons, while referring to their own
>narrow world as *holistic*.  Paradoxically, this attitude reveals that their
>methods are partialistic and not holistic. All too often, diseases and
>injuries are opportunistic and need opportunistic or ad hoc approaches from
>many disciplines for their successful resolution, not just some magic
>antibiotic bullet, acupuncture technique or homeopathic potion. The term
>*alternative* is not a synonym for *holistic* or *complementary* therapy, and
>flags should always be raised when the term *holistic* is bandied about by
>medically untrained *holists*.  Holism implies the complementarity and
>adhocracy of the full spectrum of physical and mental, allopathic and
>traditional, therapeutic approaches which have emerged from valid empirical,
>theoretical or laboratory research and clinical experience.
>
>In understanding the value of any therapy, the possibility of the decisive
>role of the placebo effect must never be ruled out, so that we can always
>remain aware that the actual healing process may have little to do with our
>presumed models.  This can be exceptionally difficult for doctors,
>herbalists, chiropractors, physios, psychiatrists, chemists, religious
>healers and others to accept, because a great deal of the success in each
>case still remains scientifically unexplained and healing validity may often
>rely more on the faith of the practitioner than any known science.
>
>It is especially important not to regard placebos as something akin to hoaxes
>or deceipts - if and when they work they should teach us more about the more
>holistic nature of our therapies.  If something can elicit a powerful placebo
>effect to facilitate a healing, be it therapeutic touch, a sugar-coated pill,
>a spinal mobilisation or bogus surgery, then, by all means use it, but don*t
>attribute it to proven science prematurely or overcharge the trusting public!
>
>DUBIOUS DEFINITIONS
>
>The world of *alternative* therapy is replete with its unique collection of
>definitions and neologisms to describe the host of ostensibly innovative,
>ancient or *secret* healing techniques and mysteries.  Among the most misused
>of all terms is the concept of *energy* in its many therapeutic forms, such
>as  *energy fields*, *energy balance*, *bioenergetics*, *healing energy*,
>*life energy* and so forth. Its original definition in physics is all but
>forgotten, even though most folk have some sort of vague recollection that
>energy is related to matter by Einstein*s famous equation, energy E = mass
>times the velocity of light squared (mc^2).
>
>Some alternative healers somehow think that energy in the mind and
>materialisations of matter follow this same equation to substantiate why
>gurus like Sai Baba allegedly can create matter out of thin air and why
>cancerous growths may appear from disruptions of  *energy fields* in the
>human aura.  They seem blissfully aware that the apparent interchangeability
>of energy and matter according to the Einstein equation refers to atomic
>fission and fusion situations and not ordinary bodily or mental  processes.
>(We could also comment at length on the huge misuse of *fields* and *energy
>fields*  by therapists, some of whom believe that they are somehow sensing
>and  orchestrating changes in the body*s *energy fields*, even though the
>stray electromagnetic fields bathing their premises undoubtedly are of far
>greater intensity).
>
>Try telling this to Deepak Chopra and the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi of TM fame,
>who explain all human mysteries on the basis of conjectural quantum energy
>effects acting at all levels of human consciousness.  The best-selling Chopra
>self help books offer a fascinating mishmash of the same old inspirational
>and philosophical aphorisms of the East blended with his medical training and
>some impressive terminological borrowings from popular physics books (like
>the *Tao of Physics* and *The Dancing Wu-Li Masters*).  The result? - huge
>hordes of admiring educated, though uncritical,  Western followers who do not
>seem to realise that not a single method or idea that he has extolled has a
>superior track record to any other allopathic or complementary healing or
>self management technique.  No wonder he is smiling his way to fame and
>fortune!
>
>And he is by no means unique - he has simply exploited the truth that it is
>easy to fool most of the people most of the time - especially if many of the
>people are dissatisfied with the status quo.  Therein lies the alpha and the
>omega of controlling the minds and money of the masses - understand how they
>think, how little they really think and then apply some very much standard
>methods of persuasion and mass appeal.
>
>SOME SPECIFIC EXAMPLES
>
>The following extracts from an interesting article in the Skeptical Inquirer
>(July/August 2000: 29-36) are most relevant to this issue of the
>*postmodernistic* rise of therapeutic occultism.
>
>BA Gaudiano & JD Herbert   *Can We Really Tap Our Problems Away?  A Critical
>Analysis of Thought Field Therapy*
>
><< Abstract:   Thought Field Therapy is marketed as an extraordinarily fast
>and effective body-tapping treatment for a number of psychological problems.
>However, it lacks even basic empirical support and exhibits many of the
>trappings of a pseudoscience.
>
>It is nothing new to find enterprising entrepreneurs seeking to profit from
>their novel inventions, which are often claimed to produce miraculous results
>for their users. The field of mental health is no exception. In fact, there
>has recently been a surge of putatively revolutionary treatments for various
>psychological problems that claim to be far superior to standard treatments
>in both effectiveness and efficiency. Known as "Power" or "energy" therapies
>(Gist, Woodall, and Magenheimer 1999; Herbert et al. in press; Swenson 1999),
>these treatments are gaining widespread acceptance among mental health
>practitioners, despite their frankly bizarre theories and techniques,
>extraordinary claims, and absence of scientific support.
>
>One of the most popular of these power therapies, known as Eye Movement
>Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR), involves a therapist waving his or
>her fingers in front of the patient's eyes while the client imagines various
>disturbing scenes that are thought to be related to the patient's problems.
>In fact, EMDR, a *power therapy' that alludes to neural networks instead of
>energy fields for its theoretical basis, has been described as a prototypical
>case of pseudoscience within mental health (Herbert et al. in press; Lohr,
>Montgomery, Lilienfeld & Tolin 1999; Lilienfeld 1996).
>
>There is another treatment approach on the rise that threatens to overtake
>EMDR as the premiere power therapy for the 21st century: Thought Field
>Therapy (TFT; Callahan 1985). Roger Callahan, TFT's inventor, claims that he
>can train therapists to be over 97% effective using his Ôrevolutionary'
>procedures in treating a variety of common psychological problems including
>anxiety and depression. Since the history of psychotherapy is replete with
>treatments that failed to live up to their initial hype, it seems prudent to
>take a closer look at TFT.
>
>Origins and Methods
>
>Callahan (1997) states that he accidentally discovered TFT while treating a
>client named Mary, who had a severe fear of water. Inspired by an acupuncture
>class he was taking at the time, Callahan instructed Mary to firmly tap the
>area under her eye with her fingers, leading to a miraculous and immediate
>resolution of Mary*s phobia. Callahan subsequently developed the
>comprehensive set of techniques and theory that is now known as TFT. The
>therapy is based on the idea that invisible energy fields called "thought
>fields" exist within the body (Callahan and Callahan 1997). Environmental
>traumas and inherited predispositions are theorized to cause blockages, or
>what Callahan terms "perturbations" in the flow of energy in these thought
>fields.  Callahan theorizes that the commonly observed neurochemical,
>behavioral, and cognitive indicators of disorders such as depression are the
>result of these perturbations. In other words, the root cause of all
>psychological problems are blockages in energy fields.
>
>In order to correct these perturbations, clients are directed by the TFT
>therapist to tap on the body's "energy meridians" in specific sequences,
>called "algorithms," which vary based on the particular problem being treated
>(Callahan & Callahan 1997). . . . . The tapping is theorized to add energy to
>the system, which then re-balances the overall energy flow, thereby
>eliminating the distress at the source. . . .
>
>TFT also borrows techniques from a procedure known as *Applied Kinesiology*
>that is used to test muscles for "weaknesses" caused by certain food or
>chemical pathogens (Sampson & Beyerstein 1996).
>
>Applied Kinesiology is a scientifically discredited procedure. For example,
>Kenny, Clemens & Forsythe (1988) found that those using the techniques did no
>better than chance in determining nutritional status using muscle testing.
>Finally, TFT even borrows some of its concepts from quantum physics. For
>instance, the idea of active information, in which small amounts of energy
>can affect large systems, is used to support the existence of perturbations
>(Bohm & Hiley 1993). There are obvious problems with the theoretical basis
>for TFT, not the least of which is the complete lack of scientific evidence
>for the existence of "thought fields."
>
>TFT, as with other new "energy' therapies, is based on misconceptions or
>outright distortions of the concept of energy as it is used by scientists
>(Saravi 1999). In physics, energy is defined simply as the capacity to do
>work, and energy exchanges are observable and measurable. Energy therapists,
>in contrast, use the term to describe a kind of universal life force that
>influences health, but they provide no direct data to document the presence
>of such a force. Saravi concludes that "New Agers' and psychobabblers'
>'energy has only a remote relationship with its physical, scientific
>counterpart. For them, it is just a word conveniently invoked to explain
>phenomena whose very existence is far from certain" (47) . . . . . .
>
>Despite these miraculous assertions, no controlled studies have been
>published in peer-reviewed scientific journals to provide evidence for TFT's
>claims. Instead, testimonials and uncontrolled case studies are offered to
>support these astonishing declarations of success (Callahan 1995). The vast
>majority of these claims are made via Internet postings (Lohr, Montgomery, et
>al. 1999). Such anecdotes, however, do not constitute probative data on the
>question of TFT's efficacy. Callahan often claims that his public
>demonstrations of TFT on television shows such as The Leeza Gibbons Show (aire
>d October 12, 1996) provide dramatic proof of success, thereby circumventing
>the need for empirical research. . . . . .
>
>Serious psychotherapy innovators go to great lengths to conduct studies to
>demonstrate that the hypothesized active ingredients of their procedures
>outperform these so-called "nonspecific" effects. No such effort has been
>made by the promoters of TFT.   Callahan, however, dismisses the possibility
>that TFT could be explained by such mechanisms. He asserts that "clinical
>evidence" has ruled out the possibility of nonspecific or placebo effects
>accounting for TFT's results, but fails to support this claim (Callahan and
>Callahan 1997). He frequently states that placebo effects cannot be operative
>in TFT because some clients express skepticism that the tapping will work
>(Hooke 1998a). This argument demonstrates a misunderstanding of the placebo
>concept, which does not necessarily require the individual to fully believe
>in the practitioner's explanation for why a procedure works (Bootzin 1985;
>Dodes 1997). . . . . . .
>
>Since the emergence of TFT, several therapists have recently developed
>offshoot therapies based on treating the body's energy fields. The most
>successful of these TFT derivatives was developed by Gary Craig. Craig
>(1997), who has a degree in engineering and formerly studied under Callahan,
>created what he calls Emotional Freedom Techniques (EFT). EFT is very similar
>to TFT, except that it employs one simplified and ubiquitous tapping
>procedure instead of applying different algorithms to treat different
>problems. . . . .
>
>The objective of a pseudoscience is often persuasion and promotion, in lieu
>of responsible investigation of claims (Bunge 1967). Web sites advertise
>courses and multilevel training in TFT techniques for thousands of dollars.
>The highest level of training in TFT is called Voice Technology (VT), which
>supposedly allows the therapist to diagnosis perturbations and treat clients
>entirely over the telephone by analyzing their voices. The effectiveness of
>VT is said to approach 100 percent (Callahan 1998). Callahan sells this
>technique for $ 100,000, and trainees must sign nondisclosure contracts that
>forbid them from discussing or revealing any aspects of the technique. . . .
>
>  . . . . .  thousands of therapists from various professional disciplines
>continue to pay for TFT training courses. Much of TFT's marketing success can
>be attributed to the prevalence of pro-TFT Web sites that promote strong
>claims of its effectiveness. TFT therapists, some of whom have no traditional
>training in psychology or psychotherapy, appear to be satisfied with TFT's
>vivid anecdotal stories of success, and are not aware of or not bothered by
>the overwhelming lack of empirical support for the procedure. Englebretsen
>(1995), among others, points to the alarming rise of postmodernist attitudes
>currently permeating the mental health field, exemplified by the willingness
>of some clinicians to value compelling anecdotal stories over controlled
>empirical data. This postmodernist mindset promotes the notion that all truth
>is relative and contextual; science is only one of many modes of thinking,
>each of which is equally valid. Such attitudes render the mental health field
>fertile breeding ground for pseudoscientific therapies such as TFT and its
>derivatives. Healthy skepticism competes head-to-head with extraordinary
>claims and, as is often the case, many mental health clinicians choose to
>ignore the facts in favor of miraculous possibilities. >>
>
>The following website of the Skeptical Inquirer is well worth referring to:
>http://www.csicop.org/si/ 
>The following web page also provides links to many sites (right at the end of
>this page) that can be invaluable in the realm of the scientific method and
>critical thinking: http://24.16.71.95/SPORTSCI/JANUARY/archives2.html 
>
>Mel Siff
>
>Dr Mel C Siff
>Denver, USA
>[log in to unmask] 
>



%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
December 2023
October 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
December 2022
October 2022
September 2022
May 2022
December 2021
November 2021
August 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
September 2020
July 2020
April 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager