Well, it's official. If you're scheduled for a coronary bypass and the local Ned Flanders is busy organizing the congregation to pray for you, order the bastard to cease and desist immediately. Science has determined that intercessory prayer may significantly increase the risk of post-surgery complications for you.
This month's issue of the American Heart Journal has a paper by Benson e. al., on the effectiveness of intercessory prayer. They begin the paper by saying:
Intercessory prayer is widely believed to influence recovery from illness, but claims of benefits are not supported by well-controlled clinical trials. Prior studies have not addressed whether prayer itself or knowledge/certainty that prayer is being provided may influence outcome. We evaluated whether (1) receiving intercessory prayer or (2) being certain of receiving intercessory prayer was associated with uncomplicated recovery after coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery.
And their conclusion?
Intercessory prayer itself had no effect on complication-free recovery from CABG, but certainty of receiving intercessory prayer was associated with a higher incidence of complications.
In English: Prayer is ineffective at best, and knowing that you're being prayed for can be a risk factor as well.
The doctors are to be commended for three things: (1) for having the cojones to study the supernatural; (2) for giving “intercessory” a slightly sinister connotation; and (3) for making the Universe a slightly funnier place.
The basic idea of the study is quite simple. There are two control variables: prayer and awareness. Either a patient may or may not be prayed for and the patient may or may not be told this fact. That gives four groups of patients, and the figure shows the number of patients assigned to the various groups in the study. Note that a patient was never told that he is not being prayed for; that, of course, would be unethical.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Dave Nalle
Interesting stuff. It does suggest that the power of prayer, both positive and negative, is entirely in the mind.
Dave
2 - Anil Menon
Dave: thanks. I think you're right. Prayer is probably closely related to the placebo effect.
3 - Amrita
from the Rigveda to the yajurveda and back again in the modern world...
text after text lumps physicians with thieves, fowlers, washermen, cobblers, harlots, and eunuchs - a look into the future and HMO-ized physicians
4 - Ruvy from Jerusalem
Hmmm...
Maimonides, the greatest of Jewish scholars was a physician.
5 - Lisa McKay
These are interesting findings indeed, and I do wonder what the investigators are thinking privately about the results.
If one accepts the notion that a positive mental attitude can improve recovery, perhaps knowing that one is being prayed over causes one to put it all 'in God's hands', therefore nullifying any benefit that might accrue from thinking positively about one's own health.
6 - Steve
Well, that's the first survey I've heard of with those kinds of results, I would be curious as to how their methodology differs from studies that have been done before, which seemed to suggest the opposite. On the other hand, only the heretical 'name it and claim it' folks would argue that God has to answer EVERY prayer affirmatively.
7 - The Cook
Here is the recipe:
Mark 11:24-25 "So I tell you, whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours. "Whenever you stand praying, forgive, if you have anything against anyone; so that your Father in heaven may also forgive you your trespasses."
Prayer has two requisites:
1. Faith.
2. Forgiveness.
That is why prayer doesn't always work.
Try harder.
Read more.
http://bible.crosswalk.com/
8 - Anil Menon
Amrita: :-)
Ruvy: Interesting counter-example. The taboos against what may be studied in medicine seem to develop when a culture attains a certain degree of security. Perhaps the Jews were never so lucky. But the case of Maimonides does "complicate" the thesis that theocracy and medicine are necessarily at odds.
Lisa: That's the first plausible explanation I've heard about why awareness may be a risk factor. Putting oneself in the hands of God could be akin to a kind of giving up, at least from the immune system's point of view.
Steve: this is the sixth study on the effectiveness of prayer; ostensibly, it was conducted in response to the many methodological criticisms leveled against previous studies. The doctors maintain a neutral tone, bordering on apology, throughout their paper.
The Cook: It's a cruel God, I think, who'll listen to only those without doubt. I can't imagine a parent who'd deny succor to his sick child simply because the aid was being asked by someone he has a quarrel with. We need a God who can live up to higher standards.
9 - Steve
My point was, God is not a genie to be summoned in times of need to grant us our every wish. We can't know all of his purposes for things, for all we know, our death may be a godsend to those beyond death. We all have to die physically sometime, anyway. You just can't assume too much.
Re. #7, Another reason for unanswered prayer is that we ask for the wrong reasons sometimes. I notice you missed that verse, I believe it is in the book of James.
Bottom line is, if God is omniscient, as the Bible says He is, you can be sure He knows what He is doing, irregardless of the outcome.
10 - chantal stone
I've just been lurking around this thread, I haven't commented because Steve, you've said everything I would have said, I agree with you completely.
It's a fine line to tread when you ask God for something and He does not deliver the outcome you desire, it's often easy to assume that He does not care, or does not exist, even. But we can never know what His plan is.
11 - Rich
Did you read the actual study or abstract? Did they find the difference between 52% and 59% statistically significant? Then why did the authors say it could be due to chance? The design of the study was flawed and a waste of Sir John's money, patients and Unity's time. It was a 30 day followup, not a long-term followup. Coronary by-pass itself is controversial, with long-term studies finding no difference in viability rates between those with it and without it. There was no attempt to control for the amount of outside prayer. The use of the phrase "No complications" in the prayers was suspect. As Freud knew, the unconscious mind does not know the difference between Yes and No.
Good April Fool's joke.
12 - Jet in Columbus
Steve and you and Chantal might want to read a debate Ruvy and I were having between #65 & 72 before you pass too harsh a judgement on me on the thread-I don't have enough faith to be an Athiest.
13 - Steve
Oh, Chantal, that's sweet of you to say so. Amen.
14 - Anil Menon
Steve: The expt. was testing whether intercessory prayer is more effective than tossing a fair coin. Suppose we think of God as a black box: uncertain motives, uncertain attributes and uncertain behavior. The box has a handle called "prayer," which people say is useful in controlling the output of the box. It's not hard to test that claim. We don't have to know how the box works or what the box's plan is, etc. All we're testing is whether the handle is effective. A handle that works on a 50% basis is basically equivalent to throwing a fair coin. Anything less and the *handle* is ineffective. Anything more and it's effective. The expt. showed that the *handle* called intercessory prayer is not effective. It doesn't say anything about the black box.
It's possible the black box changed its behavior *because* it was being tested. But even such measurement-dependent systems may be studied; Quantum mechanics is one example.
15 - chantal stone
The interpretations of this study also have a lot to do with whether or not you believe in God and in the power of prayer. A non-believer will just surmise that God does not exist after all. A believer will argue that you can't test God, and that you can't change His will, prayer or not.
One can argue that the results of the study speak for themselves, but then how significant is the difference between 52.2% and 58.6%?
Any surgery involves risk, with or without prayer. So any complications can be easily medically explained, regardless of the intercessory prayer.
16 - Steve
Rich, above, made some interesting points. I look forward to more studies, like I said, I have heard of opposing outcomes, so I would be curious as to what similarities/differences there are between those being studied.
17 - The Cook
#8
What a ridiculous statement!
"We need a God who can live up to higher standards."
Your standards or mine or...(?)
The question is who sets the standards?
You?
If you think that's the way it works, it helps explain your problem.
18 - Jet in Columbus
We had a whole nation of God loving God fearing Christians and a born again President praying for those minors in West Virginia.
tha same group prayed for the people of New Orleans.
I prefer to believe in his power within me to give me strength
sorry...
19 - Cedo
I am quitting my church.
20 - Anil Menon
Steve: Second you on the "look forward to more studies." And I agree it's premature to decide whether the scientific evidence is for or against intercessory prayer. I'm just glad we've begun to study it.
Chantal: I really don't know what to say other than that statistical testing can usually weed out the kinds of explanations you offered. And "statistical significance" is different from the normal use of the word "significance"; I used the word in the former sense. There are rules in statistical testing that characterize when a difference makes a difference.
21 - Jet in Columbus
Chantal, I sure's hell hope you understood that, because I didn't
22 - The Cook
A difference makes a difference when there is a difference.
Q.E.D.
23 - chantal stone
umm okay, let me try...that kind of went over my head, but here goes:
Anil...again, that all goes with a persons perception of God's existence and belief in prayer.
A true believer (not all, mind you) might argue that despite statistical evidence, prayer DOES work or that God's will can prevail. A believer might even say that God doesn't give two shits about "statistical significance".
A non-believer might argue that all the praying is futile.
In relation to THIS study, I would like to point out that whatever the evidence, I would not go so far as to say that prayer, or intercessory prayer does more harm than good. For many people, praying to a god they believe can help them can provide the proper mental attitude needed to overcome illness.
24 - Kurt
Jesus said; Again it is written Do not put the Lord your God to the test.
I assume they are testing God, if thats where the prayers are directed.
25 - Ruvy from Jerusalem
Anil writes, "We need a God who can live up to higher standards."
G-d revealed Himself to you in various works known as "Vedas." They are part of your heritage and you understand them better than I, but I'm sure that least some of them would be considered "works of Divine revelation".
He revealed Himself to us Jews in the Tana"kh, the Hebrew Bible.
It is my theory, that given that we Jews were not ready to carry out the charge given us by G-d, that He revealed Himself further in forms that became Christianity and Islam. They have succeeded the way they have because they are Judaism worked over a bit, and provide the basic curriculum for the future, when Jews will have to guide mankind in following the Seven Laws of Noah. But that is merely my theory, the ramblings of an undeucated Jew.
The essential point of commonality to all of these revelations was that there is a G-d, or a G-dhead that stands supreme over all creation.
Who are you or I to "fashion" a god who can live up to "higher standards?" Demanding such a thing makes us idolaters. If G-d, or the G-dhead is the Creator, and we are the created, than for us to "fashion a god that lives up to higher standards" makes us idiots indeed, doesn't it?
I would suggest attempting to understand our respective heritages of revelation better, before looking for "higher quality" gods to bow down to.