Book Review - Dr. Ersnt Draws his Sword: a Duel Begins – Correspondence with the Authors (Post 3 of 4)

Dr. Edzard Ernst, M.D., author of Trick or Treatment: the Undeniable Truth about Alternative Medicine, discusses with me, over email, whether he will accept my offer of free healing.  In the next part of our exchange, Dr. Ernst, gets a little personal.

(click here for post 1, click here for post 2)

I explained to Dr. Ernst what my offer of free healing would involve as follows: 

..........As with any client, modalities would be determined through a two-step process. Step 1: I consult spiritual beings to determine what is needed, Step 2: you and I would discuss the information received, your comfort with recommendations, and how to implement recommendations in a way that is consistent with experiment design. Through this we would develop a kind of treatment plan that would guide our work for remaining sessions.

I hope this provides you with the desired information. I am interested in what objective monitoring you suggest.

Ahnday

Perhaps it was the specter of getting spiritual beings involved in his personal life, or the idea of publically sharing his experience that threw him for a loop.  Whatever the cause, in his next email, gone was the open-minded, visionary Dr. Ernst, the man who is also known as the world’s first professor of Complimentary Medicine.  On April 1, he dashed my hopes when he declared that he had no interest in partnership…

interesting!

i am not interested in proving nor in creating a partnership.i want to test a hypothesis.this is how i understood you very first email.youe experiment is not a conlusive test:even if i feel better after you intervention,how do we know that i would not have felt exactly the same way without it?

regards

The handwriting was on the wall. I could see that more than likely I would never be blending flower remedies for Dr. Ernst, nor would we work together to solve the mysteries of Chi. Nonetheless, I wanted to him to know that I was still open and that I believed partnership would be productive.  I wrote back,

I understand that... that's why I suggested objective and subjective testing ... for the objective testing we create a hypothesis for testing and for the subjective part we record your experience, and in this way we create a well-rounded experiment. Aren't you even a little bit interested in discovering why people are healing with alternative methods even though your analysis says they won't? Think of yourself as a latter day Marie Curie, although I guarantee that distance healing won't give you radiation poisoning!

My offer's on the table. If your pluck returns, let me know.

Ahnday

I’m not sure what happened and why he responded again - maybe he wanted the last word.  Whatever his motivations, he wrote back this same day, telling me that among other things I didn’t really understand trial design. Amazingly, he also stated that he understood why people are healing with alternative medicine.  He wrote,

objective tests do also improve due to the natural history of the condition or the placebo effect etc.i'm beginning to suspect that you fail to understand the essentials of trial design.i do understand why people are healing,believe me.but this is not how you approached me in the first place.you suggested a rigorous test of youe healing method.where is it?
regards
e Ernst

WAIT! Did he just say that?  Did Dr. Edzard Ernst, MD, - the guy with a million abbreviations trailing along after his name and staunch advocate of conventional medicine – did he just say, “I understand why people are healing, believe me.”  Did he just admit that alternative healing works!?.. OMG!

Whatever he was or was not admitting to, I could tell he didn’t want any healing sessions.  I replied, letting him know that I was still open.  I tried also to give him a way out, with this email,

Do you have any suggestions for trial design - I am more than open to hearing about them and incorporating them into any experiment.

Edzard, I sense that your enthusiasm for this experiment may be waning.  (Just know that your arguments in Trick or Treatment would carry more weight with readers - that is you would have more credibility - if you were willing to submit to the methods you criticize).

If you have something specific in terms of trial design, please let me know.  For the time being, I will tell my readers that you are not interested in working with me.  My offer remains on the table.  Perhaps in the future you will change your mind.

Best to you,
Ahnday

Though I fully expected never to hear from him again, he wrote back, informing me that I had failed him.  “You [Ahnday] failed to produce the good you had initially envisioned,” he states officiously in this reply,...

(for more, see next post)

Book Review: Trick or Treatment - New Possibilities are on the Horizon!

In reading Trick or Treatment, I wondered if the authors had any personal experience with the alternative healing methods they call “implausible” in their book.  I mean, they never really explain why people using these methods often experience improved health.  

Thinking they might be interested in further exploration, on March 30, 2011, I sent an offer of 12 free healing sessions to the authors.  Reprinted below is the offer and our correspondence to date.  (Note, Dr. Ernst replied while I have not yet heard from Simon Singh!).


Dear Mr. Ernst and Mr. Singh,

I am writing to refer you to a review of your book, Trick or Treatment:
The Undeniable Facts About Alternative Medicine, published in 2008.  I am
also writing to make you two an offer – one which I believe will undermine
your conclusions about alternative medicine, if you are willing to
undertake this challenge in good faith.  This offer is detailed at the
bottom of this email.

I am former attorney and student of the scientific method.  I graduated
from Reed College in Portland, OR in 1991 with a degree in Biology.  As
you may be aware, Reed has a reputation for excellence; its science
curriculum gives students solid grounding in the scientific method.  As a
result, many Reed graduates go on to successful careers in science and
medicine.  I graduated from Hastings College of the Law in the late 1990’s
and practiced law for 9 years before becoming an alternative medicine
practitioner.  I believe very strong in the potential of both conventional
and alternative medicine.  Likewise, it is through a cooperative
partnership between alternative and conventional methods that the best
care can be made available.

As a current user and practitioner of alternative medicine, I doubted your
conclusions.  Please forgive me for saying that while your credentials are
impressive, your analysis lacks objectivity and thoroughness.  Your
reasoning is based on weak assumptions.  This prevents you from accessing
a deeper truth.  At any rate, I set some of these thoughts forth in a book
review, divided into several blog posts, with the first being located at
the http://spontaneousmystic.blogspot.com. I will say that this review has
been of interest to readers.

My offer is this: I offer each of you 12 free healing sessions to be used
within one year.  Honestly, as I read your book, I wondered if had
in-depth personal experience with the modalities on which you offer so
many expert opinions.  I wondered if you would have the pluck to commit in
good faith to a personal journey of discovery through alternative healing,
even if it undermined your assumptions.  I make this offer in the spirit
of developing a rigorous dialogue about health care alternatives as well
as a positive partnership between conventional and alternative medicine.

I, and my readers, look forward to hearing back from you on this offer,
and to discussing what is involved.  Information about me is contained on
the blog as is contact information.

Sincerely,
Ahnday Meweh

From my time at Reed College I remember how spiritual topics can send some scientists into orbit – and not in a good way - so I never really expected to hear back from these two.  However, on March 29, at nearly midnight (European time), Dr. Ernst replied by email. He said,

thanks for the offer;how would this work in practice?are you suggesting to do distant healing on us?if,so i might be interested to participate provided we monitoe the results objectively.
regards

Prof. Edzard Ernst, MD, PhD, FMed Sci, FSB, FRCP, FRCP (Edin.)

Not only was I surprised to get the email, at first I was intimidated.  My thoughts went like this, "Not only is the doctor famous, if he accepts my offer, I will have to do my best healing in order to prove the case for alternative medicine!  Still, I think I can do it!"

And after the intimidation passed, I began to get excited.  Fantasies of a meaningful partnership between alternative and conventional medicine danced in my head, along with visions of rigorous dialogue and deep exploration leading to new discoveries!  "I bet the scientist who finally proves the existence of chi will win a Nobel prize!" I told myself, “Why not Mr. Ernst?”

So, on April 1, I replied .....

(for more, see next post!)

Unexpected Development! - Book Review: The Truth about Alternative Medicine - Post 4 of 4

As way of sparking dialogue and positive partnership, I emailed Simon Singh & Edzard Ernst, M.D, authors of Trick or Treatment: The Undeniable Truth About Alternative Medicine, and offered them free healing sessions!  

I admit that when I sent the emails I fully expected to be ignored! After all, they go to great lengths in their book to prove false everything I know to be true!  Imagine my surprise when I found an email from Dr. Ernst saying that he might be interested!  (Perhaps I underestimated the good doctor!)  Tune in on Sunday for more information on this challenge and if, when and how it will go forward!

Book Review

(for Posts 1, Posts 2, and Posts 3 of the book review click here!)

.....Moreover, In Trick or Treatment, Singh & Ernst seem to suggest that because the scientific method cannot be used to prove the validity of alternative healing, no one should use alternative healing.  

To this I respond that the scientific method is designed to detect, measure, quantify and describe the physical world and is less useful in understanding the non-physical aspects of human existence. For instance:

• The scientific method cannot prove the existence of love.  Taking Singh & Ernst’s line of reasoning to its logical end, this would mean that I should refrain from falling in love, caring for my children or helping family members - activities based on love.  (Importantly, these are activities which also improve health, quality of life and prospects for longevity).   

• The scientific method cannot be used to prove the existence of willpower.  Does this mean, according to Singh & Ernst, that I should stop working to make life better?  Should I eat cinnamon rolls and maple bars all day long, forgetting the green veggies altogether?  Should I smoke cigarettes instead of go to yoga class?  Should I stop setting goals and working to achieve them?  

• The scientific method cannot prove the existence of the intellect, which, like love, willpower and chi, exists, but, is also abstract.  Do Singh & Ernst believe that college students should refuse to pay tuition on the grounds that the intellect nurtured by higher education does not, according to science, exist? Should Singh & Ernst themselves abandon their lucrative careers because science cannot prove that the minds they use every day in their work are real?  Does this mean that I am under a mandate to stop using logic to solve life challenges? 

The obvious answer to all three of these scenarios is, "Of course not!  If I waited for the scientific method to prove everything, my life – and health - would grind to a halt!"

In their defense, I don’t think that Singh & Ernst want to rid the world of life, love, logic, higher education or sound nutrition with their central assumption that, “if science can’t prove it, it is not real and cannot be trusted.”  However, taken to its logical end, this is where the argument in Trick or Treatment leads.  This is because there is so much of life that the scientific method cannot detect and therefore cannot prove.  

The idea that we should stop using our minds, stop being motivated by love and take no action in life until science can prove to its own satisfaction the existence of love, willpower and intellectual (as well as how love, willpower and intellect can be safely used by humans) seems preposterous.  More preposterous in my view than the idea that love can heal, the central theory behind why spiritual healing and energy work is effective.

In short, the fact that the scientific method, as Singh & Ernst put it, can find "no evidence for the existence of Chi,” (pp 83), in no way implies that Chi - like love, like willpower, like intellect - does not exist and cannot positively influence life and health.  What it does imply is that the scientific method is unable to discover Chi, just as it is unable to discover love, willpower and intellect.

There is no doubt about it.  Medical science has made astounding advances – many of which are breathtaking and ingenious.  It has saved and improved countless lives worldwide.  It also has limits, including:

·         high cost of medical research and care delivery;

·         limited focus on preventative medicine which stands to lower (by promoting early diagnosis and healthy habits) long-term suffering and economic loss;

·         risk of malpractice and misdiagnosis;

·         lack of quality care for the poor, uninsured and those living in rural or war-torn areas;

·         heavy reliance on prescription medications that may not resolve problems and may cause side effects or interact with other drugs;

·         biases that impact research and care including prejudices about, or lack of awareness of, the unique health concerns of women, seniors, racial and ethnic minorities, gays and lesbians, those in an awakening process and other spiritual minorities;

·         research whose scope is driven by profitability and not necessarily human need;

·         procedures that are unnecessarily invasive;

·         the responsibility for healing lies primarily with the doctor, limiting agency in the patient;

·         the inability of the modern scientific method to predict that which cannot be quantified, including the healing impact of love. 

These limitations may not seem to Singh & Ernst compelling reasons for the average person to seek accessible, empowering, flexible and preventative forms of health care.  However, these concerns are paramount to individuals faced with limited access to insurance, the high cost of medical care and a model of aging that assumes increasing rates of disease and healthcare costs as life progresses.

While I would recommend Trick or Treatment:  The Undeniable Truth about Alternative Medicine for anyone interested in exploring the culture of science and its limitations, I would not recommend it for those needing information on how to access the benefits of alternative medicine. 

(for more, see next post)

Book Review: The Truth about Alternative Medicine - Post 3 of 4

Today, I sent an email to the authors of Trick or Treatment: The Undeniable Facts About Alternative Medicine, the book that is the subject of this book review.  In this email I directed them to this book review and made them an offer of 12 free healing sessions to be used within one year if they are willing to embark in good faith of a journey of personal healing.  I anxiously await the response of Edzard Ernst, M.D. and Simon Singh to this offer!

(for Post 1, click here)

(for Post 2, click here)

Through a series of unlikely coincidences, and unwittingly at first, I tried alternative health care.  Desperate for relief I learned to meditate at a local Buddhist mediation center.  This helped me understand how thought patterns contribute to pain.  Across the street from my doctor’s office was a store selling traditional African art.  I developed a curiosity about the store. One day, after a troubling doctor’s visit, I went into the store.  Because, I was an atheist with no religious or spiritual education, I did not understand what it meant that the owner was a traditional spiritual healer or that many of the objects for sale in her store could be used for healing purposes.  

As I developed a friendship with this woman my symptoms improved dramatically.  My symptoms improved even though I did not ask the woman to do any healing work on me.  Although I did not see how it was possible, I intuitively understood that my new friend and my improved health were connected.  Overtime it became apparent that during our early conversations she had been using her traditional methods on me. The fact that I was not aware that she was healing me - and more than this, that I was an atheist and a fervent disbeliever in alternative health care  - means that I could not have received a placebo effect from her work.  I credit this woman with helping to restore my health and for opening me to a world of new possibilities.

These early experiences with meditation and spiritual healing prompted me to try other alternative modalities, like castor oil packs, astrology, yoga and Reiki.  This, combined with my own intensive training, has, ten years later, left me free of the disease that plague me for so long and for which no real cure could be seen. As a result, for myself, I know that alternative remedies work.  

What Singh & Ernst do not do in their book is create a compelling explanation for why people – including me - heal with alternative methods.  They explain why science predicts that people will not heal, but they do not explain why, outside the double blind studies - in real life - these predictions do not always hold up. 

As demonstrated by my story, the placebo effect is not a one-size fits all theory.  For these reasons I do not feel that is necessary to wait for science to prove something before taking advantage of the benefits.  However, just as with conventional medicine, users of alternative benefit from (1) education themselves about any existing health conditions, (2) taking charge of their own health,  (3) learning about various, (4) learning about the practitioners with whom they work. 

Moreover, in making the claim that they are more capable than anyone in getting at the truth of alternative therapies, Singh & Ernst suggest that they do not believe in the intelligence of the public or of practitioners who may have drawn different conclusions.  They are also resistant to developing a positive partnership between conventional and alternative medicine, a partnership that could bring a higher, more satisfying level of care.

What’s Love Got to Do with It?

Importantly, the scientific method is not the only method for finding truth.  Likewise, the scientific method cannot prove the existence of the driving force of much of human activity. Yet, absent scientific proof, humanity goes on.  

For instance, the scientific method cannot be used to prove the existence love, willpower or intellect.  Nonetheless, we believe in love, willpower and intellect because we experience the realities of love, willpower, and intellect within ourselves and others.  This personal experience is what makes us comfortable basing major life decisions – for instance who to marry, what to eat and how to overcome life challenges – on our belief in the existence of love, willpower and intellect - even though the scientific method is useless at proving their existence.

Singh & Ernst's central assumption, “If science cannot prove it, it cannot be real and cannot be trusted” does not help us to learn much about alternative healing methods other than that they are a bit mysterious and that science does not understand them.  This assumption, when compared with the experience of people getting relief from alternative medicine, shows that the scientific method is not a universally reliable method for discerning truth.

(for more see next post )