Prayer doesn't work?

[cubedbee]

Originally Posted by [url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3193902.stm

BBC[/url]]'No health benefit' from prayer

The world's largest study into the effects of prayer on patients undergoing heart surgery has found it appears to make no difference.
The MANTRA study, run from Duke University Medical Center in North Carolina, involved 750 patients.

Before their operations, they were randomly split into two groups, and half were prayed for by Christians, Jews, Buddhists and Muslims.

However, checks revealed they had fared no better than those not prayed for.

The results of the controversial study contradict earlier findings from the same team which suggested a drop of a quarter or more in "adverse outcomes" - including death, heart failure or heart attack.

However, that trial involved only 150 patients, and the more extensive research, completed this year, found no evidence of any benefits.

The study is the subject of a BBC "Everyman" documentary to be broadcast next week.

Prayer teams from various denominations and faiths were alerted by email to start intercessory prayer as soon as possible after the patient was enrolled on the trial.

Neither hospital staff, the patients, or their relatives had any idea which patients' were receiving prayer, to prevent any chance of the results being skewed.

After the patients had undergone an angioplasty procedure, in which a balloon is insterted into a heart artery and inflated to clear an obstruction, they were followed for six months to see how they progressed.

'Unwise test'

Many theologians say that, even if you believe in the power of intercessory prayer, such a trial is doomed to failure because it "puts God to the test" - and there are clear instructions in the Bible not to do this.

The Bishop of Durham, the Rt Rev Tom Wright, said: "Prayer is not a penny in the slot machine.

"You can't just put in a coin and get out a chocolate bar.

"This is like setting an exam for God to see if God will pass it or not."

Other experts are highly critical of the concept that the benefits of prayer might be "dose-dependent" - that is, that the benefits might increase as the number of people praying went up.

This is particularly important, as Duke University is at the centre of the US "Bible belt" - and many of the trial participants, regardless of whether they were randomised to receive prayer during the trial, would be getting it from relatives and friends - and of course themselves.

Dr Richard Sloan, from the New York Presbyterian Hospital, described the concept of a prayer "dose" as "absurd".

He said: "It requires us to abandon our understanding of the physical universe."

[Grace]

Of course, the devil is in the details.

[Rosebud]

Unlike a regular study, where you can be assured that your control group does not receive Medicine X, how do you show that Patient Y did not also have prayers being said for them? If my wife were in the hospital, I'd be praying for her even if she were in the control group.

Alternate theory: no additional benefit seen because prayer already occured for all patients.

[Force Majeure]

Originally Posted by [url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3193902.stm

BBC[/url]]This is particularly important, as Duke University is at the centre of the US "Bible belt"...

Um... no. Duke University is on the far eastern end of the "Bible belt". Darn Brits don't know where North Carolina is?

[Travis]

We're still ornery colonies to them

[Mulan]

I love the objections to the study... too funny - both the "god doesn't allow testing" and "dose-dependent" arguments

[Pseudolus]

What a stupid study. If God doesn't exist, then they're not going to find anything. If God does exist, then I'm pretty sure He's smart enough to outwit a bunch of scientists, so, again, they're not going to find anything. Stupid, stupid, stupid.

[cubedbee]

I think the dose dependant argument is perfectly reasonable. The God that most believers worship isn't a mindless energy that can be tapped by prayer, but rather a sentient omniscient entity. If you accept the fact that there is a God and that he listens to our prayers, there is no reason to believe that he answers them in any democratic fashion.

[Kepler!]

My wfe and I were discussing prayer last night and what I would like to know is why is praying for someone else suppose to work?

I can understand why God would respond to someone praying for themselves (i.e. submitting to God, putting faith in God, etc.), but what I don't understand is why praying for someone else is suppose to work. It can't be to bring the situation to God's attenetion (as He is all knowing) and it can't be a popularity contest (as that would make God very callous looking).

So, for you religious people out there what is the theory behind praying for someone else?

[The Mad Hatter]

There was a very flawed study a couple of years back purporting to show that prayer improves the mortality of cardiac patients. The media made a big deal about this at the time and I am pretty sure that I have encountered people citing the study to defend their religious beliefs.

If you subscribe to the "separate domains" theory of Gould, then the study is a waste of time. But to the extent that religionists continue to makes claims that have emperical imprort (miralces etc), their claims can and should be tested by science.

Edit: ah ha! I knew this was a familiar discussion.