[escepticos] RV: Press releases/complementary medicine fails tests

[planetario@...>]

Interesante....
-----Original Message-----


>I am writing to you on behalf of the Association for Skeptical Enquiry
>(ASKE). ASKE is a recently formed association of scientists, engineers and
>other men and women concerned about the uncritical promotion of paranormal
>and pseudo-scientific claims. Amongst its goals is the encouragement of the
>critical and scientific examination of complementary medicine.
>
>My purpose in writing is to draw your attention to two new press releases
>we have received about forthcoming reports in the Scientific Review of
>Alternative Medicine (SRAM) and the Journal of the American Medical
>Association (JAMA). The reports both concern recently conducted tests of
>practitioners of Therapeutic Touch, an allegedly therapeutic technique that
>is widely practised by nurses in the United States and sometimes used by
>members of the nursing community in the United Kingdom and other parts of
>Europe. The tests suggest that the claim that Therapeutic Touch
>practitioners are able to detect a 'human energy field' is without
>foundation.
>
>The texts of the press releases are reproduced below.
>
>For further information about the SRAM report, please contact Lewis Vaughn
>at
>FIvaughn en aol.com
>
>For further information about the JAMA report, please contact Scott
>Roskelly at
>SCOT ROSKELLY en ama-assn.org
>
>
>Press Release # 1.
>
>March 24, 1998
>FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
>
>Contact:      Wallace Sampson (650) 948-1683
>Lewis Vaughn (716) 636-7571
>
>'Therapeutic Touch' Fails a Rare Scientific Test.
>
>A simple experiment assesses whether a practitioner can really detect
>'human energy fields'.
>
>AMHERST, NY-Therapeutic Touch (TT) is an "alternative" medicine technique
>said to be used by over 40,000 nurses in North America alone. Despite its
>widespread use, practitioners of TT have been reluctant to submit their
>therapy to scientific testing. But now researchers have conducted a rare
>scientific study of the key claim made by practitioners--the claim that
>they  can detect a "human energy field" unknown to science and to "heal"
>people by  "balancing" the field. The results of this test will be reported
>in the new Spring 1998 issue of The Scientific Review of Alternative
>Medicine, available April 24. (Advance copies of the study are available
>upon request. Call  800-421-0351.)
>
>"A recent review of the literature shows that there is no convincing
>evidence that the alleged healings by TT are anything more than the placebo
>effect,"  says Wallace Sampson, MD, Editor of the Scientific Review. "Most
>writings on TT are speculation and commentary, which simply do not address
>the core question: Can TT practitioners detect alleged 'energy fields' or
>not? This simple experiment, though limited in scope, is a direct,
>scientifically valid  test of this question."
>
>As detailed in the report, before the experiment, a TT practitioner agreed
>to the study protocol and asserted that she could distinguish between the
>"energy field" of an injured or painful limb and that of a normal limb.
>During the  test, she attempted to distinguish the "energy fields"
>surrounding the arms of two different people, one with a painful wrist and
>one with no symptoms. When the practitioner knew the identity of the two
>participants (through the use of normal senses), she was able to correctly
>distinguish the two people. But when  the identity of the two participants
>was hidden from her, she failed to correctly distinguish between the two,
>scoring no better than that predicted by chance.
>
>"Even though the results of this single test were negative, it does not
>rule out the possibility that TT energy fields exist or that other TT
>practitioners can detect them," say Robert Glickman, RN, and Ed J. Gracely,
>PhD, authors of the new report. "However, the existence of 'human energy
>fields' and the ability to detect them remains extraordinarily doubtful.
>
>"TT proponents have spent 20 years focusing on which ailments TT can be
>used for, without first determining if anyone could actually detect a human
>energy field. Practitioners have made a poor showing in the few times they
>have allowed themselves to be tested, and the large majority has been
>silent."
>
>Despite this lack of evidence, TT is now supported by major nursing
>organizations such as the National League of Nurses and the American Nurses
>Association. "Energy-field disturbance" is now listed as a nursing
>diagnosis by the North American Nursing Diagnostic Association.
>
>
>THE SCIENTIFIC REVIEW OF ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE is the only peer-reviewed
>medical journal in the world devoted exclusively to the scientific
>evaluation of "alternative" medical claims. The review publishes original
>research, critiques published studies, reviews available evidence for
>claims, and discusses the methods and principles of valid research. Topics
>covered in the Spring 1998 issue include acupuncture, oxygenation therapy,
>naturopathy, magnet therapy, St. John's Wort, the ethics of alternative
>medicine, and an experience with a Tijuana cancer doctor. The journal is
>published by Prometheus Books and sponsored by the Council for Scientific
>Medicine.
>
>
>Press Release # 2.
>
>EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE:  3 p.m. (CT) Tuesday, March 31, 1998.
>Media Advisory:  To contact Linda Rosa, B.S.N., R.N., call
>970/667-7313.
>
>THERAPEUTIC TOUCH FAILS TO DETECT "HUMAN ENERGY FIELDS".
>Further professional use of therapeutic touch is unjustified.
>
>CHICAGO-Therapeutic touch practitioners, who claim to treat many medical
>conditions by using their hands to manipulate a "human energy field,"
>failed to detect the "field" under test conditions, according to an article
>in the April 1 issue of The Journal of the American Medical Association
>(JAMA).
>
>Linda Rosa, B.S.N., R.N., from the Questionable Nurse Practices Task Force,
>National Council Against Health Fraud, Inc., Loma Linda, Calif., and
>colleagues studied the use of therapeutic touch, a technique they say is
>taught in more than 100 colleges and universities in 75 countries and is
>used by nurses in at least 80 hospitals in North America. Therapeutic touch
>is grounded on the concept that people have an "energy field" that is
>readily detectable and modifiable by therapeutic touch practitioners.
>
>Twenty-one practitioners of therapeutic touch were tested in a study to
>determine if they could detect human "energy fields."  During each test,
>the practitioners rested their hands, palms up, on a flat surface,
>approximately 10 to 12 inches apart to see if they could perceive the human
>"energy field" of a nine-year-old  grade-school student who hovered her
>hand over one of the practitioner's hands. To prevent the student's hands
>from being seen, a tall, opaque screen with cutouts at its base was placed
>over the practitioner's arms, and a cloth towel was attached to the screen
>and draped over them.
>
>During a 1996 testing session, each practitioner underwent a set of 10
>trials.  Before each try, the practitioner was permitted to "center" or
>make any other mental preparations deemed necessary. The student flipped a
>coin to determine which of the subject's hands would be the target. The
>student then hovered her right hand, palm down, three to four inches above
>the target and said, "Okay." The practitioner then stated which of his or
>her hands was nearer to the student's hands. In the initial trail, the
>practitioners stated the correct location of the student's hand in 47
>percent of the tries.
>
>The researchers found:  "Twenty-one experienced therapeutic touch
>practitioners were unable to detect the investigator's 'energy field.'
>Their failure to substantiate therapeutic touch's most fundamental claim is
>unrefuted evidence that the claims of therapeutic touch are groundless and
>that further professional use is unjustified."
>
>In 1997, trials were conducted again, only this time, each practitioner was
>allowed to "feel" the  student's energy fields in each of her hands in
>advance and choose which hand the student would use for testing.  The test
>results were similar to those of the first series.  The practitioners
>correctly located the student's hand in 41 percent of tries.
>
>The authors write:  "If human energy fields perception through therapeutic
>touch was possible, the experimental subjects should have been able to
>detect the experimenter's hand in 10 (100 percent) of 10 trials.  Chance
>alone would produce an average score of five (50 percent)."
>
>They continue:  "Practitioners of therapeutic touch are generally reluctant
>to be tested by people who are not proponents.  In 1996, the James Randi
>Educational Foundation offered $742,000 to anyone who could demonstrate an
>ability to detect a human energy field under conditions similar to those of
>our study.  Although more than 40,000 American practitioners claim to have
>such an ability, only one person attempted the demonstration.  She failed,
>and the offer, now more than $1.1 million, has had no further volunteers
>despite
>extensive recruiting efforts."
>
>They conclude:  "To our knowledge, no other objective quantitative study
>involving more than a few therapeutic touch practitioners has been
>published, and no well-designed study demonstrates any health benefit from
>therapeutic touch. These facts, together with our experimental findings,
>suggest that therapeutic touch claims are groundless and that further use
>of therapeutic touch by health professionals is unjustified."
>
>The authors write:  "Therapeutic touch practice guides describe three basic
>steps, none of which actually requires touching the patient's body. The
>first step is centering, in which the practitioner focuses on his or her
>intent to help the patient. This step resembles meditation and is claimed
>to benefit the practitioner as well.  The second step is assessment, in
>which the practitioner's hands, from a distance of five to 10 cm. [two to
>four inches], sweep over the patient's body from head to feet, 'attuning'
>to the patient's condition by becoming aware of 'changes in sensory cues'
>in the hands. The third step is intervention, in which the  practitioner's
>hands 'repattern' the patient's 'energy field' by removing 'congestion,'
>replenishing depleted areas, and smoothing out ill-flowing areas.  The
>resultant 'energy balance' purportedly stems disease and allows the
>patient's body to heal itself."
>
>According to the researchers, both therapeutic touch theory and technique
>require that a human energy field be felt in order to impart any
>therapeutic benefit to a subject. The authors contend that the definitive
>test of therapeutic touch is not a clinical trial of its alleged
>therapeutic effects, but a test of whether practitioners can perceive human
>energy fields.  Terms used in print and by practitioners to describe what a
>human energy field feels like include:  "tingling, pulling, throbbing, hot,
>cold, spongy, and tactile as taffy."
>
>Therapeutic touch was conceived in the early 1970s by Dolores Krieger,
>Ph.D., R.N., a faculty member at New York University's Division of Nursing.
>The authors write:  "Soon after its conception, TT [therapeutic touch]
>became linked with the westernized notions of the late Martha Rogers, dean
>of nursing at New York University.  She asserted that humans do not merely
>possess energy fields but are energy fields and constantly interact with
>the 'environmental field' around them."
>(JAMA.  1998;279:1005-1010)
>#
>For more information:  contact the AMA's Scot Roskelley at 312/464-4431.
>email:  SCOT_ROSKELLEY en ama-assn.org
>