• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Science confirms validity of intercessory prayer

Spartan

Spartan

Well-Known Member
sayak83 said:
Actually

Science has found no actual effect of intercessory prayer on recovery.

Intercessory prayer for the alleviation of ill health. - PubMed - NCBI

OBJECTIVES:
To review the effects of intercessory prayer as an additional intervention for people with health problems already receiving routine health care.

SEARCH STRATEGY:
We systematically searched ten relevant databases including MEDLINE and EMBASE (June 2007).

SELECTION CRITERIA:
We included any randomised trial comparing personal, focused, committed and organised intercessory prayer with those interceding holding some belief that they are praying to God or a god versus any other intervention. This prayer could be offered on behalf of anyone with health problems.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS:
We extracted data independently and analysed it on an intention to treat basis, where possible. We calculated, for binary data, the fixed-effect relative risk (RR), their 95% confidence intervals (CI), and the number needed to treat or harm (NNT or NNH).

MAIN RESULTS:
Ten studies are included in this updated review (7646 patients). For the comparison of intercessory prayer plus standard care versus standard care alone, overall there was no clear effect of intercessory prayer on death, with the effect not reaching statistical significance and data being heterogeneous (6 RCTs, n=6784, random-effects RR 0.77 CI 0.51 to 1.16, I(2) 83%). For general clinical state there was also no significant difference between groups (5 RCTs, n=2705, RR intermediate or bad outcome 0.98 CI 0.86 to 1.11). Four studies found no effect for re-admission to Coronary Care Unit (4 RCTs, n=2644, RR 1.00 CI 0.77 to 1.30).Two other trials found intercessory prayer had no effect on re-hospitalisation (2 RCTs, n=1155, RR 0.93 CI 0.71 to 1.22).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS:
These findings are equivocal and, although some of the results of individual studies suggest a positive effect of intercessory prayer,the majority do not and the evidence does not support a recommendation either in favour or against the use of intercessory prayer. We are not convinced that further trials of this intervention should be undertaken and would prefer to see any resources available for such a trial used to investigate other questions in health care.
Click to expand...

Too bad they didn't include the studies that contradicts those findings, and they didn't publish the specific methodology of their studies or who comprised the prayer groups (atheists, agnostics, etc.?). Like my studies show, when Christians prayed, the results supported the findings noted in the OP.
 
Spartan

Spartan

Well-Known Member
The Reverend Bob said:
Dude, prayer is outside the purview of science, no scientist can prove that it is beneficial or non-beneficial, it just can't be done and those who try are chasing after the wind. This isn't even a argument or debate, it people arguing nonsense going back and forth with more nonsense.
Click to expand...

Sorry, the studies in the OP show your opinion is not correct. That's why they used a double-blind study.
 
charlie sc

charlie sc

Well-Known Member
The Reverend Bob said:
"At least I can..." What are you...two years old? Basically you are saying "I know you are, what am I?" Jesus ******* Christ.
Click to expand...
Yes, that's what I am saying. You didn't even read the open-source ones, but still made comments. So, I try explaining, even though I know you're a troll. Nope. no work. You can't read it nor understand my explanation even tho I copy pasted. Yep, I'll resort to kindergarten tactics. lol
 
The Reverend Bob

The Reverend Bob

Fart Machine and Beastmaster
charlie sc said:
Yes, that's what I am saying. You didn't even read the open-source ones, but still made comments. So, I try explaining, even though I know you're a troll. Nope. no work. You can't read it nor understand my explanation even tho I copy pasted. Yep, I'll resort to kindergarten tactics. lol
Click to expand...
So in your mind theists are predisposed to crime because you say a study that was obviously flawed to everyone else but you says theists are predisposed to crime and you have somehow proven it so even though no one agreed that you had indeed proven anything. Is this what you are thinking?
 
Spartan

Spartan

Well-Known Member
charlie sc said:
You didn't cite any studies. What you did do is say this person did a study. Great.
You can give the Title, the link or the DOI number. If not, we might as well be waiting for unicorns to show up.
Click to expand...

Yeah, go ahead and wait for your mother-loving unicorns. Will you still have your blinders on then?
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Spartan said:
Nice try. But the two studies I cited had Christians / Protestants praying. The STEP study had a religious cult that didn't believe in intercessory prayer as it's prayer group. That group ("The Unity School of Christinity") had a Christian sounding name but it was anything but Christian.

Ron Rhodes, who has a doctorate in systematic theology and who has authored some sixty theological books, noted, "The Unity School of Christianity is definitely not Christian." Probe, a respected Christian journal, calls Unity "a classic new age cult that is not Christian in any aspect of its doctrines or teachings." Even the co-founder of the cult, Charles Fillmore, once wrote, "God never performs miracles."

So, as Dr. Brown (see the OP) noted, the studies are different because (the STEP study) "has a different inclusion" criteria. She also stated, the STEP study "is instructional on how NOT to conduct a study of Christian prayer."
Click to expand...
Special pleading fallacy. And your study is rather old and appears to not be well accepted. I linked more than one study and the real peer review appears to say that there is no effect.
 
Subduction Zone

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Spartan said:
Yeah, go ahead and wait for your mother-loving unicorns. Will you still have your blinders on then?
Click to expand...
You did not link any studies. The only studies that have been linked here refuted your claims. Make sure that you have a study from a well respected professional journal.
 
Left Coast

Left Coast

This Is Water
Staff member
Premium Member
The Reverend Bob said:
I don't have too, I find all sort of contradictory studies. And if you weren't so lazy , you could too. It is easy.

In this pile of "scientific" peer-reviewed babble, I could find studies that say prayer is positive and studies that say prayer has no effect and studies that say it has negative effects:

Google Scholar

It all right at anyone's fingertips, name a prejudice and I'll find a study confirming your bias. Science is bull****.
Click to expand...
Scientists are well aware a study could theoretically find a completely improbable result purely by chance. That's why they calculate a p value for their results. It's also why we look at meta-analyses, which is what @sayak83 posted. Finding studies that have produced contradictory results and then throwing up your hands and saying, "UGH THIS SCIENCE STUFF IS BS!" is childish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top