Reiki

[Fanatic]

Has anyone tried Reiki? Could you tell me a little bit about it?

It seems blinkered to me, nobody has any proof so I will blindly follow and conclude it must be bullshit. Rather than nobody has proved it yet hence I cannot be sure.

Before anyone had any proof that the world was round, everyone was certain it was flat and without proof you would be an idiot to suggest otherwise. They were all wrong though.

I find the crowing of the validity of your scientific knowledge over other peoples experiences slightly uncomfortable.

Do you think that because something cannot be proven to work, that it should not be practiced?

for entropy, of course

"Before anyone had any proof that the world was round, everyone was certain it was flat and without proof you would be an idiot to suggest otherwise. They were all wrong though."

They didn't, you know. The ancient Greeks knew that it was round. It's always only ever been bonkers people and the Roman Catholic church that thoughtnit was flat!

seeker, does that prove that if you shout down others loud enough, you hope the world will take notice and change its shape?

Also I am a fully qualified Reiki Master (I used wikipedia to 'distance attune' myself).

And I can almost certainly come up with a better class of bullshit based on quantum mechanics than the average Reiki Master due to my plethora of degrees in the subject.

I mean did you know that you have to rotate objects through 720 degrees before the electrons are back in the same orientation? Yup not 360...oh no...720. Have you factored that into your hand positions? I don't think so.

So come to entropygirl's parlour of spintronic Pauli exclusion Reiki...nothing else quite hits the spot.

But there IS PROOF. It would indeed be foolish to have an opinion on whether it works or not if there was NO PROOF. BUT THERE IS PROOF THAT IT DOESNT WORK.

It has been tested. IT DIDNT WORK. It would be blinkered in the extreme to believe something might work when there is PROOF THAT IT DOESNT WORK.

People at no point HAD PROOF that the earth was flat. They had an opinion that the earth was flat.

No we have proof that the earth is round. It would be foolish to continue thinking that one day proof that the earth is flat may yet be found....

This could be ground-breaking, entropy. Why not share with the world IRL, and share your experiences as a reiki master on the web? That would be far more effective than mumsnet. We're small fry. You could end misunderstanding on this forever.

it has belatedly occurred to me that gob is deliberately winding me up.

I mean noone would actual refer to accepting peer review scientific evidence that something doesn't work as 'blinkered'.

We don't have a lack of evidence that it works, we have actual evidence that it doesn't.

"Add message | Report | Message poster genug Mon 11-Jun-12 13:21:34
seeker, does that prove that if you shout down others loud enough, you hope the world will take notice and change its shape?"

Eh?

Well I would but I don't want another run in with the advertising standards agency....

Well we have proof that the earth is not exactly round. But perhaps the trouble with proofs is an inconvenient matter, when the mere word 'proof' is clearly meant to end what started off as an amicable chat.

But I have (admittedly scanned, my science goes up to A level and no further) read some of what I can find saying it is ineffective and people have actually taken the time to find out that is does not work on things like diabetes, really? You don't say.

If you tried something unorthodox and it worked for you, would you not then be sorely tempted to think that maybe there was something in it?

seeker, the Roman church, of course - you did imply they shouted down others they found inconvenient...

Oh and I am not winding you up entropygirl, I am genuinely somewhere between interested and confused.

I

bizarrely in my everyday life as a scientist I don't get to meet a lot of people who don't understand about controlled trials....MN has been quite an exciting experience for me.

I do feel like it is my job to try and explain it....you know spreading the sacred fire of enlightenment....and you know it really is quite simple.....

if you want to know if something works or not, you try it and see. If it doesn't then you stop trying to come up with reasons why it should work.

The only even slightly complicated part is that "try it and see" is only an accurate method if it applied to a LOT of people in a controlled manner. Because people feel /get better all the time even if you do nothing. But seriously that is all there is to it!

Actually I have patients to see, and this is getting nowhere anyway. NHS, run of the mill, allopathic medicine with trials and proofs, but perhaps that makes me better prepared to be open minded?

Would be useful to see any NEW points of view and experiences...

gob

okay I will try and believe in you....but we are failing to communicate somehow...

If I tried something and got better I would genuinely think well maybe it worked and maybe I just got better.

But tbh it is unlikely that I would spend money on something without checking if it was a tested therapy. If there was genuinely no evidence at all either way available then I might try something just in case.

But I would never try something that costs money and has been shown to be ineffective. I'm not rich enough!

Some things have not been shown to work. This means they may work or not but haven't been tested.
Other things (Reiki, homeopathy, applied kinesiology etc.) have been shown NOT to work. This means they have been tested and found not to work.

genug being open minded when there is no compelling evidence is a good thing. In fact it is the scientifically correct thing to be. I am open minded about any therapy that has not yet been tested or about which the data are unconclusive.

Being open minded in the face of compelling evidence is just plain pointless.

Should I be open minded about which way my ten pence coin will fall when I let go? After all we don't understand everything about gravity...so maybe this time it will fall upwards?

But if you take CBT and tried to cure cancer I imagine you would have a pretty dismal faliure rate.

Wonder how the red bull as a migraine cure study would pan out?

If Reiki is claiming to change a persons state of mind there is no point in conducting trials with physical ailments and pointing and laughing.

I have come across a few Reiki practioners and even a few masters. It was the pyramid seller of the early 90s - pay £X thousands (no that is not a mistype - it did cost thousands) to become a Reike Master, then you can charge students thousands to become attuned. Eventually every Tom, Dick and Harry obtained Reiki Attunement and the pyramid fell over.

gob well indeed. But if it proposed as a cure for depression then it needs to be shown to work for depression.

CBT has been shown to work for depression/anxiety. Reiki hasn't.

okay in the time since my last post I have papers showing clinical evidence that Reiki performs no better than sham for depression.

So it is not really a matter of testing the wrong thing is it?