hich scientific study is this? It is not the 1988 study that
makes the researcher interested, but because it remains true that
many actually hold what I might deem a false belief in the
supernatural. An article may not change many minds, but neither do
articles like football ones in the papers do anything other than
inform. The effect of the article does not contribute to its
believability. As for your assertion, what significant proof is
there for the validity of the claim? Medical science does not fail,
but reaches the limit that is set by our level of knowledge. When
Europe was suffering from the black death, did healing by faith
play a part? Medical science also was said to have "failed" then,
causing the absurd claims of religious trying to advocate a cure.
Fools whipped themselves bloody, bled themselves dry etc. Only in
the 1930s did sulfonamide drugs become effective
treatments.
Let's not go too far into the medieval times.
If you can find an article that debunk faith healing - there are
quite many - you can find at least one that support faith
healing.
That was the one conducted by cardiologist Randolph Byrd, M.D.,
1988. It was published in the medical journal.
In 1999, another study conducted by William S. Harris
of St. Luke's Hospital also showed positive effects.
In both studies, the patients were not told about it in order to
eliminate the placebo effect. It involved two-pronged attack -
prayers and medication.
Medical science has not reach the pinnacle yet. In some cases,
medical science has nothing to offer.
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View> <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:DoNotOptimizeForBrowser /> </w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]-->