Effectiveness of "distant healing" prayer:

Used in addition to medical treatment

Sponsored link.

Quote:

Controversy about the use of distant healing prayer:

Prayer at a distance, (a.k.a. distance healing, intercessory prayer, remote healing, anonymous prayer, etc.) involves a person or a team praying on behalf of an individual who might be some distance away, and a stranger. Its effectiveness is controversial:

Early history of distant healing prayer:

In 1872, an anonymous Britisher suggested that a study be made involving "one single ward or hospital." It would be subjected for three to five years to sustained prayer by "the whole body of the faithful." The proposed experiment would keep records of healing and mortality rates, comparing them to other hospitals elsewhere in England. This triggered a national "prayer-gauge controversy" in Britian during 1872 and 1873. ₄

Francis Galton, a scientist and cousin of Charles Darwin, analyzed the life span achieved by  "...people who were the objects of much prayer—kings, clergy, missionaries," He found that they lived no longer than average in spite of prayers on their behalf. ₄

Apparently, this field of study did not progress for eleven decades.

Randolph Byrd: Coronary Care study in 1988:

Byrd randomly divided 393 patients at San Francisco General Hospital's coronary care unit into a prayer and no prayer group. It was a double blind study: neither the patients and staff knew which group each patient was in. The first names of the prayer group was given to three to seven born again intercessors. The latter were also supplied with each patient's diagnosis, condition and occasional updates. In his 1988 report, Byrd wrote that for six out of 26 outcomes (the need for diuretics, antibiotics, ventilation therapy, etc) the prayed-for patients did better than the control group. The media widely reported that prayer had proven to work!

Skeptics pointed out that there were 20 outcomes for which the test group did not fare better than the control group. ₄

Elizabeth Targ: Small AIDS patient study in 1998:

Psychiatrist Elisabeth Targ at the Pacific College of Medicine in San Francisco, CA, conducted a six month study among 40 persons with AIDS using what she called "distance healing."  It was funded by a grant of over $600,000 from the National Institutes of Health. All patients were given normal medical treatment for various AIDS-related illnesses. Pairs of subjects were selected, matched with CD4+ level, age and number of previous AIDS-related complications. One in each pair was then prayed over by 40 healing practitioners, "ranging from rabbis to Native American medicine men to bioenergetic psychics." This was a double-blind test. Neither the patients nor the professionals conducting the tests were aware of which patients were being prayed for. The results showed that those who were not prayed for spent six times as long in hospital and contracted three times as many illnesses. The chance of this result occurring randomly is less than 1 in 20. ₅

In another study, she evaluated the effectiveness of distance healing to shrink tumors in mice. She found that the greater the distance between the healer and mouse, the greater the effect. Targ suggested that the connection "...could be actuated through the agency of God, consciousness, love, electrons or a combination."

Leon Jaroff, author of an article in Time Magazine commented:

"Skeptics suggest that subconsciously, or perhaps consciously, Targ is emulating practitioners of the paranormal. With preconceived notions about the outcome of an experiment, they generate reams of data from tests that are not rigidly controlled and then sift through the data to find numbers supporting their original thesis, while ignoring anything to the contrary."

"Then, there's the circumstantial evidence. Writing in the journal Skeptical Inquirer, columnist Martin Gardner noted that Elizabeth Targ is the daughter of Russell Targ, best known for collaborating with physicist Harold Puthoff at the former Stanford Research Institute, where the duo was duped into believing that Israeli magician Uri Geller had paranormal powers. While a teenager, Elizabeth immersed herself in psychic experiments and developed what she claimed were powers of remote viewing — the ability to visualize events and objects at distances far beyond the range of vision. In a 1984 book co-authored by her father, she is credited with correctly predicting winners of horse races, as well as the 1980 Presidential victory of Ronald Reagan-feats that I modestly admit to having performed myself." ₆

Duke University studies - Small scale pilot study of 1998:

The Duke University Medical Center in North Carolina studied 150 patients who had undergone angioplasty between 1997-APR and 1998-APR. This procedure involves positioning a balloon inside a hardened and narrowed artery. It is then inflated to force the artery open. This is followed by a second procedure: stanting: A flexible mesh tube is inserted into the artery to keep it open. The patients were divided randomly into five groups of 30. One group received standard treatment. The other four groups received an additional treatment, using one of the following alternative therapies: guided imagery, stress relaxation, healing touch, or intercessory prayer. Prayer was provided by seven prayer groups around the world, composed of followers of various religions. The various alternative treatments did not affect the clinical outcomes of the patients. However, those receiving alternative therapies "had lower absolute complication rates and a lower absolute incidence of post-procedural ischemia during hospitalization." Of the four alternative therapies, intercessory prayer seemed to provide the greatest therapeutic benefits.

These results were particularly important. Unlike many previous studies on the effect of prayer on patient recoveries, this was a double blind study. Neither the researchers nor the patients knew which of the 60 patients who did not receive guided imagery, stress relaxation, or healing touch had received intercessory prayer. Many previous studies of this general type were not double blind and thus allowed researcher bias to adversely affect the results.

Unfortunately, the Duke study only involved 30 patients who were the recipients of prayer. A much larger group needed to be studied in order to provide definitive results. Duke University followed up the pilot study with a second larger investigation.

Mayo Clinic: Large coronary patient study in 1999:

A randomized controlled trial was conducted between 1997 and 1999. It involved 799 coronary care unit patients. When they were discharged from the hospital, half of them were assigned to an intercessory prayer group. Five persons prayed at least once a week for 26 weeks on behalf of their assigned patient. Records were kept of the occurrence of a "primary end point" which included death, cardiac arrest, or coronary revascularization, emergency department visit for cardiovascular disease, or rehospitalization for cardiovascular disease.

They found:

They concluded that intercessory prayer had no significant effect on medical outcomes after hospitalization in a coronary care unit. ₇

Two additional small studies in 1998 & 1999:

Victor Stenger refers to two "intercessory prayer studies that have been published in medical journals, accompanied by great media hype. For example, cardiologist Randolph Byrd has claimed evidence that coronary patients benefited from blind, distant intercessory prayer. But his p-value is only five percent. ₈ Such results would be expected from statistical fluctuations alone every twenty experiments, on average. Another study along the same line as Byrd's has been published in a major medical journal... ₉ There, positive results are reported at a p-value is four percent, but for different criteria than Byrd's. In fact, they fail to confirm Byrd's specific results." ₁₀

Columbia University "study" of 2001:

This study involving three researchers at prestigious Columbia University in New York, and a very highly respected peer reviewed journal, the Journal of Reproductive Medicine (JRM). In theory, this research paper appeared both conclusive and remarkable. It examined the pregnancy rate of 199 women in Seoul, South Korea who were undergoing in-vitro fertilization. They were randomly selected to form a test group of 100 and a control group of 99. An extremely complex prayer protocol was used. Christians in the U.S., Australia, and Canada prayed over faxed photographs of the Korean women in the test group, praying for conception success. Other prayers prayed that the first set of prayers would be successful. A third tier of prayers prayed that the second set would be successful. Allegedly, none of the women were informed of the study.

The paper reported that 50% of those women who received prayer conceived. Only 26% of those who were not prayed for became pregnant. Unlike many other studies before and since, these result were statistically significant (p = 0.0013). The data were overwhelming. Here at last was a solid proof that anonymous, remote intercessory prayer (IP) actually worked! The press, TV and other media publicized the results widely.

Dr. Bruce Flamm, a clinical professor of gynecology and obstetrics at the University of California was puzzled about what he felt were irregularities in the study. Eventually many strange events are reported as having surfaced:

Flamm authored an article in the Skeptical Inquirer magazine for 2004-SEP. ₂ He wrote two articles in The Scientific Review of Alternative Medicine in 2002 and 2004. _12,13

A Google search using a search string: Wirth, Columbia, prayer revealed about 1,360 hits of which many are skeptical reports of the study. Others accept the study at face value and cite it as proof that IP works.

Duke University studies - MANTRA study of 2003:

This experiment, Monitoring and Actualization of Noetic TRAinings, was been billed as "the worlds largest study into the effects of prayer on patients undergoing heart surgery..." It was led by a cardiologist, Dr. Mitch Krucoff, and involved 750 angioplasty patients in nine hospitals who were randomly divided into two groups of 375. Both groups were given normal medical treatment. One of the groups was prayed for by 12 groups who followed various religions: Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism and Islam. They were alerted by E-mail as soon as possible after the patient was enrolled in the trial. This was a double blind study; none of the hospital staff, or the patients, or the patients' relatives were aware of which 375 patients were receiving prayer. The patients were studied for six months to see how they progressed. The data showed no difference in outcome between the two groups. Prayer neither helped nor hindered their recovery. _14,15

Reactions:

"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 center of the US 'Bible belt' - and many of the trial participants, regardless of whether they were randomized to receive prayer during the trial, would be getting it from relatives and friends - and of course themselves. ₁₅

That is, their own prayer plus the efforts of friends and family may produce a type of prayer saturation, so that prayer by strangers at a distance might not have any additional effect.

Duke University studies - MANTRA II study of 2005:

Duke University reported on their third double blind study into remote healing in The Lancet magazine -- the leading British medical journal -- for 2005-AUG.

The study involved 748 patients with heart problems. They were divided into four groups:

There was no significant difference among the four groups in terms of clinical outcomes.

Lead investigator. Dr. Mitchell Krucoff, said: "We thrilled about this. It has been very startling to be hit with a media response and e-mails that so superficially misinterpret our findings." Stacey Chase, writing for Science & Technology News stated: "Although anonymous prayer was not shown to lessen serious complications, hospital readmissions, or death, Krucoff said the study provides the groundwork for future clinical trials." In this study, the researchers arranged a "higher dose" of prayer by enrolling additional congregations.

Reactions:

"An explanatory theory is often a luxury in medicine that is late in arriving. Our knowledge of consciousness and its effects in the world are so appallingly primitive that we should encourage further research activity in the field of remote healing intentions."

"An important part of OPR's role is to be the conscience to make sure premature conclusions aren't drawn from this frontier research. We have analyzed hundreds of prayer studies and can affirm there in no definitive study on prayer; there are only formative research enterprises. But just as it has in other fields of study, the science of prayer research will grow. Observation builds on observation. Studies build on studies. Each time a study like MANTRA II is released we learn as much about how to conduct this kind of research as we do from an analysis of the outcomes." ₁₇

Harvard University study:

Dr. Herbert Benson, a cardiologist at Harvard University, is also conducting a study of distant healing.

David Myers, a social psychologist at Hope College in Holland, Mich., has predicted that it will also fail to show any effect on patients’ clinical outcomes. He said: "My understanding of God and God’s relation to the world would be more challenged by positive than null results." ₁

Conclusions:

Some past studies have shown that remote prayer promotes healing. However, none have reached the level of certainty required to produce confidence that a real effect is being observed. Many of the studies have been defective in their organization, so that researcher or subject bias affected the results. The first large double-blind analyses -- the Mayo and MANTRA studies -- have shown that prayer neither aids nor inhibits healing.

Some of the studied performed to date have involved multi-faith teams involved in intercessory prayer. For example, the Targ study involved Jewish, Native American,  perhaps a follower of the New Age, and probably others. The MANTRA study involved Buddhists, Christians, Jews, Muslims, and perhaps others. It might be revealing to further analyze the data to differentiate among the various religions followed by the prayer groups. Conceivably, prayers from followers of one or more of the religions could be shown to be more effective that the others. That would be a remarkable result! It might give some insight into the nature of God: whether God prefers one religion over others, or all religions equally.

It is unlikely that any study into the effectiveness of prayer will fully convince everyone. If a properly designed study were conducted which proved beyond reasonable doubt that prayer works, the results would profound effect on both religion and medicine. It would force scientists and physicians to review their basic understanding of the universe.

With so many large experiments failing to show that remote prayer helps in any significant way, funding for additional studies might well dry up.

References used:

The following information sources were used to prepare and update the above essay. The hyperlinks are not necessarily still active today.

1. Stacey Chase, "Does prayer research have a prayer?," Science & Theology News, 2005-SEP-07, at: http://www.stnews.org/
2.    B.L. Flamm, "The Columbia University 'Miracle' Study: Flawed and Fraud," Skeptical Inquirer, 2004-SEP.
3.    "Can Prayer Heal? Scientists Suggest Recovery May Be the Hand of God at Work," ABC News, 2001-AUG-13, at: http://abcnews.go.com/
4.    David G. Myers, "Is prayer clinically effective?" Hope College, at: http://www.davidmyers.org/
5.    Po Bronson, "The third-most odds-defying, eye-popping discovery in the life and work of Elisabeth Targ, MD," Wired Magazine, Issue 10.12, 2002-DEC, at: http://www.wired.com/
6.    Leon Jaroff, "Investigating the power of prayer," Time, 2002-JAN-16, at: http://www.time.com/
7. J.M. Aviles, et al. "Intercessory prayer and cardiovascular disease progression in a coronary care unit population: a randomized controlled trial." Mayo Clinic Proceedings. 2001;76:1192-1198. See: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/
8. Randolph C. Byrd, "Positive therapeutic effects of intercessory prayer in a coronary care unit population," Southern Medical Journal 81, no. 7 (1988). Pages 826 to 829.
9. W.S. Harris, M. Gowda, J.W. Kolb, C.P. Strychacz, J.L. Vacek, P.G. Jones, A. Forker, J.H. O'Keefe, and B.D. McCallister, "A randomized, controlled trial of the effects of remote, intercessory prayer on outcomes in patients admitted to the coronary care unit," Archives of Internal Medicine 159 (1999). Pages 2273 to 2278.
10. Victor Stenger, "Reality check: The science of prayer," Skeptical Briefs newsletter, 2001-DEC, at: http://www.csicop.org/
11. Leon Jaroff, "Questioning Healing Prayer. A reevaluation of a study threatens to tarnish the reputations of two prestigious institutions," Time magazine, 2004-JUL-01, at: http://www.time.com/
12. B.L. Flamm, "Faith healing by prayer: Review of Cha, KY, Wirth, DP, Lobo, RA. Does prayer influence the success of in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer?" Sci Review Alt Med 2002; 6(1):47-50.
13. B.L. Flamm, "Faith healing confronts modern medicine," Sci Review Alt Med 2004; 8(1):9-14.
14. "Power of prayer found wanting by scientists," Chicago Sun-Times, 2003-OCT-15, at: http://www.suntimes.com/
15. " 'No health benefit' from prayer," BBC News, 2003-OCT-15, at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/
16. The "Good Fig: News for Christians" web site is at: http://www.goodfig.org/
17. "Office of Prayer Research Welcomes Release of MANTRA II," Office of Prayer Reserach press release, 2005-AUG-10, at: http://www.officeofprayerresearch.org/

Copyright © 1996 to 2005 by Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance
Originally written: 1996-JAN-14
Latest update: 2005-SEP-23
Author: B.A. Robinson