Exorcisms were more popular in the past, but they still occur today. In fact, the ritual continues to be a formal part of the Roman Catholic Church, which defines exorcism as what happens “when the Church asks publicly and authoritatively in the name of Jesus Christ that a person or object be protected against the power of the Evil One and withdrawn from his dominion.”18 Recent polling suggests that about 51 percent of U.S. adults believe a person can be possessed by the devil or some other spirit,19 and 46 percent believe in the power of exorcism, despite the fact that these things have never been shown to exist in any verifiable way. There are some believers in demonic possession who will claim that natural sicknesses have been ruled out, or that the allegedly possessed individual performed feats of superhuman strength, had adverse reactions to certain “holy” objects, or levitated, but these are nothing more than unsupported claims. In most cases, people who make these assertions have seen one too many fictional films dealing with the topic. Certain aspects of the typical movie-style possession, like negative reactions to any object, could be psychological or a result of faking. But there isn’t any evidence to suggest human levitation could occur unaided under any circumstances, so if they can prove this has happened they could change the way we view science (and the world in general).
FAITH HEALING IN MY LIFE
Believers in some form of faith healing or another will accuse me of being closed-minded on the subject, but that couldn’t be further from the truth. I’ve been interested in so-called faith healers and their work for as long as I can remember, and I’ve personally tried crystal healing, acupuncture, and a number of similar “alternative medicines” in an attempt to deal with my own issues, as well as performed independent investigations on countless other supernatural and pseudoscientific healing claims. However, unfortunately for us and the scientific and medical communities at large, none of these miracle cures have ever been shown to accomplish anything beyond the power of the placebo effect.
Don’t get me wrong. There is certainly a time and place to utilize placebos. When I was very young, for example, if I got a scrape or a burn, my older sister would have me close my eyes so that she could apply “magic medicine.” There was no real treatment—it was just spit or water—but I usually felt better as a result of the placebo effect and that’s all I really needed at that time. This process is no different (although admittedly it was much cheaper and less harmful) than the tactics used by faith healers who continue to fool millions of adults each and every day.
My interest in faith-based “medicine” began early. When I was about 10 years old, a friend of my family told me that I could cure my cold through crystal healing and gave me a book on the subject. I was fascinated by the book and the prospect of magical rocks that could make me feel better. I followed all the instructions diligently and repeated the process multiple times per day for more than a week, but I realized my symptoms subsided at about the same rate as they did without the “treatment.” I did the same thing each time I felt ill and ultimately concluded that the system wasn’t working. I remember being upset that someone would lie to me about this so-called miracle cure, until I realized she believed it herself. I now know that crystals are functionally identical to all other placebo-based “medications,” and not just to me, but also to every scientist who has rigorously tested them and to every peer-reviewed, scientifically valid study. If new research suggests otherwise someday, I’ll reconsider my position. But the anecdotal “It worked for me!” claims will never suffice, especially because placebo “works” just as well.
ACUPUNCTURE
I didn’t stop experimenting with faith-healing methods after my experience with the crystals. As an adult, I also submitted myself to a number of other so-called alternative pain management systems that were wholly unsupported by scientific data. First I tried acupuncture and, while I thoroughly enjoyed the relaxation, sounds, smells, etc., it didn’t help to cure my chronic neck pain from which I had been suffering for years.20 For those who don’t know, acupuncture is defined as “the method of treatment based on influencing the body by inserting needles in the specific points of human body, called acupoints.”21 Acupuncture, derived from ancient Chinese Medicine, is very popular throughout Asia and the United States, and has even been applied to veterinarian medicine,22 but it remains problematic because the process relies on acupoints and even the flow of a mysterious energy called “qi,” neither of which have ever been shown to exist. This poses a significant challenge to acupuncturists, according to Steven P. Novella, who says “carefully controlled scientific studies consistently show that it does not matter where you stick the needles or even if you insert needles.”23
“To further support this conclusion, the perceived effectiveness of acupuncture does not depend on the degree of training or experience of the acupuncturist (so whatever they are learning has no effect), but only upon how warm and nice they are to the patient,” Novella wrote for Science-Based Medicine.24 “In short, acupuncture is an elaborate placebo.”
Am I saying that acupuncture can’t be relaxing or calming, or that it can’t provide some positive effects? No, of course not. In fact, I’m stating the opposite: acupuncture is so often relaxing and calming, it so regularly causes positive effects, that those feelings are mistaken for cures. Through scientific inquiry, we should be able to look at and explain these good outcomes associated with acupuncture. If the needles aren’t unblocking built-up qi energy flowing through our bodies, then what is happening? There are a lot of potential contributors. In addition to the placebo effect from the expected cure, the discomfort from the needles could distract a person from other points of pain, or perhaps endorphins released by the pins trigger a general sense of euphoria. But these benefits aren’t long-term solutions, and they should be recognized for what they are: momentary positive feelings.
People all over the world think acupuncture is more effective than placebo, and many believers suggest it can cure just about anything from hot flashes25 to AIDS,26 but absolutely nobody presents peer-reviewed scientific data proving these claims because it simply doesn’t exist. There are hundreds of controlled, scientifically valid studies on acupuncture, each showing the practice to be no more effective than placebo.27 There are some smaller studies showing results that barely surpass the placebo effect, but in these cases a thorough look at the researchers’ processes will often reveal some sort of pro-acupuncture bias. The phenomenon of cultural bias is why Chinese studies on Chinese acupuncture are more likely to report positive results than studies from the United States,28 but there are other research and publication biases, too. That’s part of why studies with support from pharmaceutical companies sometimes report more positive results (i.e., the drug worked) than those funded by the government.29
If you believe acupuncture is a “cure” for anything—that it is more than a relaxing and peaceful experience often used to distract from pain—then you should be able to describe the process by which it works. If you ignore the scientific explanations for its benefits, which are supported by the lack of peer-reviewed studies pointing to acupuncture alone as more effective than placebos, then you always have the answer given by acupuncturists themselves: the needles correct imbalances in a mystical energy, called qi, which flows through undetected channels in our bodies, referred to as “meridians.” That’s not to say you can’t still frequent acupuncturists if you enjoy the experience, but you should treat your real medical problems with real medicine. If you are intellectually honest about the facts and about your reasoning, the knowledge that acupuncture relies on placebo won’t necessarily affect your future experiences.
It’s important to note that, even if I had seen results with the crystals or acupuncture, my personal experience would never be considered scientifically verifiable evidence proving their efficacy. My experience with crystals and the continuance of my chronic muscle pain after receiving chiropractic and acupuncture treatments are no more proof of those methods’ inefficacy than bel
ievers’ tales of positive experiences are proof that they work.
WHEN THERE’S A FORK IN THE ROAD, DON’T TAKE THE HOMEOPATH
Homeopathy is one of the most prevalent faith-healing mechanisms in the world today. While it may be a popular trend at the moment, it is not new by any stretch of the imagination. In November 2009, British surgical oncologist Michael Baum and Edzard Ernst, an academic physician and researcher, called fellow doctors’ attention to how long homeopathy has been around without its claims being verified by scientific evidence. In their article, published in the American Journal of Medicine, they also referred to homeopathy as “among the worst examples of faith-based medicine.”
Homeopathic principles are bold conjectures. There has been no spectacular corroboration of any of its founding principles … After more than 200 years, we are still waiting for homeopathy ‘heretics’ to be proved right, during which time the advances in our understanding of disease, progress in therapeutics and surgery, and prolongation of the length and quality of life by so-called allopaths have been breathtaking.30
Homeopathy is the idea that, contrary to all evidence, remedies can be prepared by repeatedly diluting a substance until almost no “active ingredients” are remaining. The problem with this notion isn’t just that it is unreliable and false, and that it has been debunked by every person who has intentionally “overdosed” on homeopathic pills,31 but that people die all the time from easily curable diseases because they are treated by homeopaths who often instruct the patient to disregard modern medicine.32 I’m not the only one who sees homeopathy as an issue. In fact, the BBC reported in November 2015 that government officials in the United Kingdom were “considering whether homeopathy should be put on a blacklist of treatments.”33 And the National Health Service itself says there “is no good-quality evidence that homeopathy is effective as a treatment for any health condition.” There is a similar sentiment from the medical community in Australia, where the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP) asked pharmacists not to sell products based on homeopathy, which “has no effect beyond that of placebo as treatment for various clinical conditions.”34
“Homeopathic products are sometimes considered harmless as they are generally administered at a high dilution. Some may not even contain a single molecule of the original source material,” RACGP officials wrote in their position statement, pointing to issues associated with treatment avoidance and lack of product regulation. “However, there are a number of risks associated with the use of homeopathy.”
When a pharmaceutical company in the United States tries to gain approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for a new drug, the corporation is required to conduct enough scientific testing to establish that it has medicinal value above that of the placebo effect. Unlike real medical treatments and pain medications, however, homeopathic substances aren’t regulated by the FDA (or many other similar agencies around the world) and manufacturers aren’t generally held responsible when they are shown not to work or to have unadvertised negative side effects. Homeopathic medicines don’t have (or need) this regulation because they have no healing or damaging properties, but unfortunately that doesn’t stop manufacturers and sellers from misrepresenting their products’ efficacy to everyday consumers who are duped out of their money and well-being. This lack of regulation in the enormous market of “alternative medicine” has caused numerous lawsuits,35 and some groups, such as the Center for Inquiry (CFI), have even asked the FDA to label homeopathic substances as untested and unproven. Consumers spend $3 billion per year on highly diluted pills and elixirs with very little or no active ingredients, but many aren’t aware that these so-called medicines aren’t evaluated by the government, according to CFI.
“When people get sick or hurt, they are confronted with countless products that claim to be able to make them better,” said Ronald A. Lindsay, then-president and CEO of CFI, in a statement on August 20, 2015. “They cannot be blamed for not distinguishing between effective remedies and pseudoscience from the 1700s if both products share the same store shelves, and there is no labeling on homeopathic drugs to indicate they are given a pass by the FDA. Clear labeling on homeopathic products, that catches consumers’ attention and informs them that the FDA does not evaluate these products for safety or effectiveness, is an easy way to ensure that people looking to treat their illnesses are not fooled into thinking that homeopathic drugs are real medicine.”
Although unrecognized “natural” remedies aren’t always regulated, there has been significant research to determine whether or not they work. In November 2015, for instance, Australia’s Department of Health published a report finding that 17 “natural therapies” are simply not effective and therefore don’t deserve a rebate on private health insurance. The study, conducted by Chief Medical Officer Professor Chris Baggoley, revealed that there were some health benefits to massage therapy, yoga, tai chi, and others, but that, “Overall, there was not reliable, high-quality evidence available to allow assessment of the clinical effectiveness of any of the natural therapies for any health condition.” The therapies investigated by the Australian government included aromatherapy, Ayurveda, homeopathy, naturopathy, reflexology, and more.36
Prior to gaining support (and therefore regulation) from health authorities, proponents would have to satisfactorily show that homeopathy cured a specific ailment. Before that’s even remotely possible, believers would first need to demonstrate—scientifically—that the dilution methods practiced by the vast majority of homeopathic manufacturers are capable of curing anyone of anything. Unfortunately for believers, because there is little, if any, of the so-called active ingredients left in the final products, the results have been shown in study after study to be the same as the placebo effect.3738 Until that healing power is proven, to claim a homeopathic healing would be to assume a positive outcome was caused by the so-called treatment itself—and that’s not necessarily the case. This is the post hoc, ergo propter hoc logical fallacy, and also the foundation of superstition, prayer, witchcraft, and more.
To be clear: I’m not saying natural remedies can’t ever work and that only pharmacies can dispense viable medicine, but all remedies must be shown to actually have healing properties before they can be considered beneficial. I’ve noticed a lot of people say “homeopathic” when they mean “natural,” but these are not synonyms. There’s a difference between placebos, like homeopathy pills, and proven natural healing agents, such as aspirin (as acetylsalicylic acid) derived from the bark of a willow tree. As Jonathan C. Smith explains, “alternative medicine” has become a catchall category that combines paranormal approaches with basic nutritional supplements, exercise, and relaxation.
“A patient may experience benefit from a relatively benign approach involving vitamins or exercise and conclude that alternative medicine has value,” Smith wrote. “He or she may then feel comfortable exploring more risky borderline paranormal and paranormal alternative treatments. Knowing what’s paranormal, and what’s not, can help us navigate this medical minefield.”
Because “faith healing” and “natural remedy” are such vague terms, applying to dozens of systems spanning the history of humanity, it is important to nail down some definitions and address the major practices individually.
CHIROPRACTIC CONFUSION
Chiropractic is an alternative medicine that exists in many incarnations, including some that posit spinal joint dysfunction as a major contributor to nonmusculoskeletal diseases. The process was founded by nineteenth-century “magnetic healer” and salesman Daniel David (D. D.) Palmer, who said spine manipulation could cure deafness and just about anything else,39 but it has been altered and revised and remains widely practiced today. The problem with chiropractic, in fact, is that it is too widely practiced, with Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services data showing that the Medicare program paid $496 million for chiropractic treatments in the United States in 2012.40
Instead of being used as a last
-ditch effort to remove back pain in adults, chiropractic services are being offered for all kinds of ailments and to just about anyone—including young children—often with disastrous results. Some believers insist against all evidence, for example, that chiropractic care can cure a number of non-spine-related ailments in kids, including infant colic.41 These claims are made more troublesome by the fact that young people are often seriously injured when chiropractic “adjustments” go wrong.42 In one case study, for instance, a six-year-old boy suffered stroke-like symptoms brought on by neck trauma from a visit to a chiropractor.43 In another unfortunate case, a 30-year-old man died after suffering from a stroke in the chiropractor’s office.44 There have been numerous other deaths linked to chiropractic manipulations, leading some researchers to conclude that “the risks of this treatment by far outweigh its benefit.”45
Some modern chiropractors rightfully attempt to distance themselves from the system’s origins as a cure-all process founded by a woo healer, and from Palmer’s “Innate Intelligence” theory on the organizing properties of living things. Chiropractic historian Joseph C. Keating Jr., for instance, said chiropractors “stick out like a sore thumb” among professionals who claim their practices are based on science due to their “unrelenting commitment to vitalism.”
No Sacred Cows Page 46
