Chance News 19: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
==Another Look at "The Kindness of Strangers?"== | ==Another Look at "The Kindness of Strangers?"== | ||
In a recent wiki, [http://chance.dartmouth.edu/chancewiki/index.php/Chance_News_17#The_Kindness_of_Strangers.3F The Kindness of Strangers] can be found a commentary regarding [STEP] the latest statistical attempt to foist intercessory prayer--IP as it is now known--into the realm of science. Nevertheless, despite the excellence of the wiki, some additional comment is in order. As stated, the $2.4 million dollar waste of time was sponsored by the foundation of the billionaire John Templeton; for more on the individual, his son and the foundation, and why so many "American medical schools now offer courses on links between health and spirituality," the reader is directed to www.johnhorgan.org/works2.htm. In short, the answer is money for the asking. | In a recent wiki, [http://chance.dartmouth.edu/chancewiki/index.php/Chance_News_17#The_Kindness_of_Strangers.3F The Kindness of Strangers] can be found a commentary regarding [STEP] the latest statistical attempt to foist intercessory prayer--IP as it is now known--into the realm of science. Nevertheless, despite the excellence of the wiki, some additional comment is in order. As stated, the $2.4 million dollar waste of time was sponsored by the foundation of the billionaire John Templeton; for more on the individual, his son and the foundation, and why so many "American medical schools now offer courses on links between health and spirituality," the reader is directed to www.johnhorgan.org/works2.htm. In short, the answer is money for the asking. | ||
The same issue of The American Heart Journal which contained the paper by Benson--there are, believe it or not, 15 other authors!--also has an editorial by Krucoff, Crater and Lee which states "the STEP investigators' interpretation of the study results appears to reflect more the cultural bias that healing prayer...is only capable of doing good if it does anything at all." Unfortunately, the editorial while being skeptical, fails to note some other failures inherent in the article. | |||
Discussion | For one thing, unlike real medicine, there is no notion of dosage as in amount of time spent per individual praying. For another, in defiance of physical laws, distance between patient and prayers [St. Paul, MN, Worcester, MA and Lee's Summit, MO] appears to be irrelevant. And then, there is the statistical difficulty of going from a sample to a population. As is virtually always true, the people doing the praying are Christians. Consequently, while the patients who were prayed for in this study did worse than those who weren't prayed for, it is conceivable that other religions would score higher. However, Templeton is not a Moslem, Shintoist or a Hindu so we will never know because I suspect his foundation is not eager to pursue this line of reasoning. | ||
The Annals of Behavioral Medicine, June 13, 2006 has an excellent article, "Are There Demonstrable Effects of Distant Intercessory Prayer? A Meta-Analytic Review" by Masters, Spielmans and Goodson. STEP is not included but 14 other studies are, including the discredited one by Lobo, Cha and Worth--Lobo withdrew his name and Worth is in prison. Based on their meta-analysis, Masters, Spielmans and Goodson write, "There is no scientifically discernable effect for IP as assessed in controlled studies. Given that the IP literature lacks a theoretical or theological base and has failed to produce significant findings in controlled trials, we recommend that further resources not be allocated to this line of research." | |||
===Discussion=== | |||
1. Why is the following phrase cherished by statisticians and other scientists? "Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence." | 1. Why is the following phrase cherished by statisticians and other scientists? "Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence." | ||
2. If one assumes that IP is absurd, what is it about conventional prayer--prayer by the patient, prayer by his loved ones, etc.--that distinguishes it from IP? | 2. If one assumes that IP is absurd, what is it about conventional prayer--prayer by the patient, prayer by his loved ones, etc.--that distinguishes it from IP? | ||
3. If IP has some effect, is it ethical to prayer for someone without his knowledge? | 3. If IP has some effect, is it ethical to prayer for someone without his knowledge? | ||
4. Benson claims "We were unable to locate other Christian, Jewish or non-Christian groups that could receive the daily prayer list of this multiyear study." Suppose they did locate these other groups. Speculate on the outcome if these other groups were included. | 4. Benson claims "We were unable to locate other Christian, Jewish or non-Christian groups that could receive the daily prayer list of this multiyear study." Suppose they did locate these other groups. Speculate on the outcome if these other groups were included. | ||
5. According to www.improvingmedicalstatistics.com/Columbia%20Miracle%20Study1.htm when referring to Daniel Worth, "A good rule of thumb for a medical journal is that anyone who uses the names of dead children in order to fraudulently obtain bank loans, jobs and passports is not a reliable source of data." However, the other two authors are medical doctors so should suspicion diminish? | 5. According to www.improvingmedicalstatistics.com/Columbia%20Miracle%20Study1.htm when referring to Daniel Worth, "A good rule of thumb for a medical journal is that anyone who uses the names of dead children in order to fraudulently obtain bank loans, jobs and passports is not a reliable source of data." However, the other two authors are medical doctors so should suspicion diminish? | ||
6. Steven Weinberg is a Nobel Laureate in Physics and an atheist. He once said, I am all in favor of a dialogue between science and religion, but not a constructive dialogue." What do you think he means? | 6. Steven Weinberg is a Nobel Laureate in Physics and an atheist. He once said, I am all in favor of a dialogue between science and religion, but not a constructive dialogue." What do you think he means? | ||
7. Discuss how the interest in IP reflects the shift to the right in American politics and religion. | 7. Discuss how the interest in IP reflects the shift to the right in American politics and religion. | ||
8. What sort of pardox is implied when people of faith need statistics to buttress their beliefs? | 8. What sort of pardox is implied when people of faith need statistics to buttress their beliefs? | ||
Revision as of 20:03, 2 July 2006
Quotation
Like dreams, statistics are a form of wish fulfillment. - Jean Baudrillard
Forsooths
forsooth1
source
date
forsooth2
source
date
Another Look at "The Kindness of Strangers?"
In a recent wiki, The Kindness of Strangers can be found a commentary regarding [STEP] the latest statistical attempt to foist intercessory prayer--IP as it is now known--into the realm of science. Nevertheless, despite the excellence of the wiki, some additional comment is in order. As stated, the $2.4 million dollar waste of time was sponsored by the foundation of the billionaire John Templeton; for more on the individual, his son and the foundation, and why so many "American medical schools now offer courses on links between health and spirituality," the reader is directed to www.johnhorgan.org/works2.htm. In short, the answer is money for the asking.
The same issue of The American Heart Journal which contained the paper by Benson--there are, believe it or not, 15 other authors!--also has an editorial by Krucoff, Crater and Lee which states "the STEP investigators' interpretation of the study results appears to reflect more the cultural bias that healing prayer...is only capable of doing good if it does anything at all." Unfortunately, the editorial while being skeptical, fails to note some other failures inherent in the article.
For one thing, unlike real medicine, there is no notion of dosage as in amount of time spent per individual praying. For another, in defiance of physical laws, distance between patient and prayers [St. Paul, MN, Worcester, MA and Lee's Summit, MO] appears to be irrelevant. And then, there is the statistical difficulty of going from a sample to a population. As is virtually always true, the people doing the praying are Christians. Consequently, while the patients who were prayed for in this study did worse than those who weren't prayed for, it is conceivable that other religions would score higher. However, Templeton is not a Moslem, Shintoist or a Hindu so we will never know because I suspect his foundation is not eager to pursue this line of reasoning.
The Annals of Behavioral Medicine, June 13, 2006 has an excellent article, "Are There Demonstrable Effects of Distant Intercessory Prayer? A Meta-Analytic Review" by Masters, Spielmans and Goodson. STEP is not included but 14 other studies are, including the discredited one by Lobo, Cha and Worth--Lobo withdrew his name and Worth is in prison. Based on their meta-analysis, Masters, Spielmans and Goodson write, "There is no scientifically discernable effect for IP as assessed in controlled studies. Given that the IP literature lacks a theoretical or theological base and has failed to produce significant findings in controlled trials, we recommend that further resources not be allocated to this line of research."
Discussion
1. Why is the following phrase cherished by statisticians and other scientists? "Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence."
2. If one assumes that IP is absurd, what is it about conventional prayer--prayer by the patient, prayer by his loved ones, etc.--that distinguishes it from IP?
3. If IP has some effect, is it ethical to prayer for someone without his knowledge?
4. Benson claims "We were unable to locate other Christian, Jewish or non-Christian groups that could receive the daily prayer list of this multiyear study." Suppose they did locate these other groups. Speculate on the outcome if these other groups were included.
5. According to www.improvingmedicalstatistics.com/Columbia%20Miracle%20Study1.htm when referring to Daniel Worth, "A good rule of thumb for a medical journal is that anyone who uses the names of dead children in order to fraudulently obtain bank loans, jobs and passports is not a reliable source of data." However, the other two authors are medical doctors so should suspicion diminish?
6. Steven Weinberg is a Nobel Laureate in Physics and an atheist. He once said, I am all in favor of a dialogue between science and religion, but not a constructive dialogue." What do you think he means?
7. Discuss how the interest in IP reflects the shift to the right in American politics and religion.
8. What sort of pardox is implied when people of faith need statistics to buttress their beliefs?