The Power of Magnets to heal - my personal story...

originally posted by: UniFinity
a reply to: GetHyped
"Using careful observation?"

really?
why don't they than carefully observer why magnets work on a lot of people...they should start there.

They already have and it's a load of bunk:

Abstract
BACKGROUND:
Static magnets are marketed with claims of effectiveness for reducing pain, although evidence of scientific principles or biological mechanisms to support such claims is limited. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the clinical evidence from randomized trials of static magnets for treating pain.
METHODS:
Systematic literature searches were conducted from inception to March 2007 for the following data sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine Database), CINAHL, Scopus, the Cochrane Library and the UK National Research Register. All randomized clinical trials of static magnets for treating pain from any cause were considered. Trials were included only if they involved a placebo control or a weak magnet as the control, with pain as an outcome measure. The mean change in pain, as measured on a 100-mm visual analogue scale, was defined as the primary outcome and was used to assess the difference between static magnets and placebo.
RESULTS:
Twenty-nine potentially relevant trials were identified. Nine randomized placebo-controlled trials assessing pain with a visual analogue scale were included in the main meta-analysis; analysis of these trials suggested no significant difference in pain reduction (weighted mean difference [on a 100-mm visual analogue scale] 2.1 mm, 95% confidence interval -1.8 to 5.9 mm, p = 0.29). This result was corroborated by sensitivity analyses excluding trials of acute effects and conditions other than musculoskeletal conditions. Analysis of trials that assessed pain with different scales suggested significant heterogeneity among the trials, which means that pooling these data is unreliable.
INTERPRETATION:
The evidence does not support the use of static magnets for pain relief, and therefore magnets cannot be recommended as an effective treatment. For osteoarthritis, the evidence is insufficient to exclude a clinically important benefit, which creates an opportunity for further investigation.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Stop blaming the scientific method for not validating your magical beliefs.

a reply to: GetHyped

okey...

yet, some people are getting magically better.

it is not a belief if someone is aware of it and control it, like you do your hands...in my opinion, you just don't realize full potential of the human mind and our mother nature.

Yes, it is magical indeed!

You've replied to questions I asked other posters, but thank your for the reply.

originally posted by: tanstaafl
Who knows? But it does, so, while I would love to know the how and why myself, in the end, it doesn't really matter how it works, what matters most - to those of us who want to reap the benefits of such a cheap and effective therapy - is the fact that it does...

I want to know, I am a health professional interested in all types of cures,I never dismiss anything just like that, but I need real evidence.

How does gravity work? How does a single cell, under certain conditions, grow into a fully developed human baby? I know there are some here who can (probably) describe the mechanics of both really well - but can you explain the fundamental how or why? No (if you are honest).

I can explain how a cell becomes a little person, and I can also explain the pathophysiology of the most common diseases and the pharmacology of the most common drugs. To me the explanation is really important, it may not be for the layperson, but to me it is. The form of quackery I despise the most is the promotion of cures that cannot be explained, because they can endanger lives.

I would also ask - please show the studies proving that radiation and chemotherapy work to 'cure' cancer. Oh, right - they don't exist.

Sure, here is a meta-analysis of 123 studies that included 100,000 women with breast cancer. This study came to the conclusion that chemotherapy not only works, it decreases their risk of dying of cancer by one third.
LINK

I can search for more articles if you want.

originally posted by: UniFinity
yet, some people are getting magically better.

As I said earlier in this thread:

I'll take proper clinical trials over unsubstantiated testimonials on the internet any day of the week.

originally posted by: Dr X
Tesla's own research into EM radiation suggested that "radiant energy", longitudinal light waves could heal or kill, depending on the frequency.

Except that light isn't longitudinal. As evidenced by that LCD monitor you're looking at.

Why do people get leukaemia near high power lines?
That has not been explained yet.

Actually, we did nearly 15 years ago, on a hoax web site. Only we couldn't bring ourselves to actually, you know, TAKE the money from the marks. Although they sure offered it to us.

It's due to nuclear power plants. They produce radioactive electricity. And when you force the electricity into high pressure power lines, it leaks out MORE.

This also happens around transformers. The circular windings in a transformer literally SLING the radioactive electricity out of the wires into the surrounding area. So you're also more likely to die of leukemia near a switchyard.

But not if you have RadGuard 2000, baby, it's the only known scientific protection against radioactive electricity.

originally posted by: UniFinity
a reply to: Bedlam

first please read the article I linked.
People with NO science live up to 140 years and have babies at 60. How many people in modern society can say that...well for them it is normal and without ANY science or modern medicine!

Except you're looking at a really isolated subset of humanity. It's a small population that's very inbred, living in a sort of static environment. They're not living to that age because of magnets, it's due to the fact that they live that long. You get pockets of similarly long lived people in parts of Japan.

You're right - it's normal for THEM. But I'm not sure how this has any bearing at all on the discussion.

It's normal for YOU to die at about 30, or at least it was back in the good old days when we didn't have science at all. I'd say it's a nice improvement.

if you can show me magnetic field I will show you subtle energy...using just our senses and nothing else.

Why with that limitation? Science doesn't just use 'our senses and nothing else', or you'd never know bacteria existed. I can, however, measure and detect magnetic fields all the live long day. And modify, produce, and quantify them. You cannot do so with 'subtle energy' because it doesn't exist.

With this, I am just pointing to a reality outside our awareness of five senses. The way our body and senses works seems so normal that we accept it as the truth and all there is...well that is normal.

Obviously, you've never done any science or engineering whatever. Very little of it is done based on 'your five senses'. To think that is a limitation or characteristic of science is amazingly faulty.

On the other hand, I'm talking about your 'subtle energy'. You comment on it as if it were something you know about and can produce or influence. But if it's not detectable at all, then you can't know if it's there, if you're doing anything with it at all, or if it is changing. It's a lot like the conmen who try to sell 'detoxes'. It ends up being your imagination.

Imagination is great for having new ideas, but it totally sucks as a measuring device.

Something is wrong with the quoting mechanism on ATS, multi-level quotes are broken, at least for me. Maybe NoScript is causing a problem? I'll experiment...

Using careful observation? really?
why don't they than carefully observer why magnets work on a lot of people...they should start there.

They already have and it's a load of bunk

First: who is 'they'?

Second: this was not one of your gold standard 'PCRDB' studies, this was merely a meta-study conducted by searching existing literature. Existing literature is filled to the brin with bad and/or outright falsified studies that still show up when performing these kinds of searches. These are quite often essentially worthless, because they can easily be designed to provide exactly what the one performing it wants to 'prove' (by excluding and/or including only that which will support what you want to find). Another large factor that will determine its value is knowing the credentials and backgrounds of those doing the study, and who is funding it and why. Since there i no money to be made from a positive outcome, these kinds of studies are virtually always funded by those who do not want to find a positive outcome.

Some people just cannot stand anything that places them outside their comfort zone. These same people often cite things that they do not read or comprehend.

Sorry, but the abstract you quoted certainly does not come to the conclusion that it is a 'load of bunk'.

Read for yourself the last bit you yourself provided:

INTERPRETATION:
The evidence does not support the use of static magnets for pain relief, and therefore magnets cannot be recommended as an effective treatment. For osteoarthritis, the evidence is insufficient to exclude a clinically important benefit, which creates an opportunity for further investigation.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...
This admission, combined with the likelihood that the study was flawed from the beginning, suggests the exact opposite of 'bunk'.

Stop blaming the scientific method for not validating your magical beliefs.

Any sufficiently advanced technology will look like magic to those less advanced.

Maybe try to open up your mind just a little to the possibility that science is not perfect, especially when corrupt human emotions enter into the equation.

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: Bedlam
Bedlam, you've made it clear you think the use of magnets is woo-woo, we get it, please go bother someone else's thread.

I'm sorry - when did you ascend to super mod status? I missed the announcement.

My thread, and I don't appreciate hijackers.

You created it, but you don't own it. Nor are you the gatekeeper for discussion about the subject. And I'm not hijacking it. Just not agreeing with you.

I have no problem with discussion, I just dislike when someone tries to pass off condescending dis-respectful rants as 'discussion'.

i.e. 'agree with me or I'll become cross'

Objection: assumes facts not in evidence.

Aka, positing a strawman.

"You are wrong, friend. The relief was as close to 'instantaneous' as can be for something like this - 24 hours from terminal agony to pain free "

...and I am 100% positive that it was the magnets that did it, whether you like it or not.

I neither like nor dislike. To me, part of the interest in the story is why an obviously rational person would ignore the many many other things that were apparently going on to focus on one thing in that congeries that 'had to be it'. Despite there being no proof at all that magnets do anything in the way of healing, and a lot of proof that they don't.

I'm sorry that the mere idea that there may be something out there that you don't understand offends you so, maybe you should get some help with that.

The thing that 'offends' me so are the ever-fascinating leaps to conclusion. If 'offend' is the right word. Fascinate is more appropriate, I think. What would be GREAT is if this could be reproduced - it can't, at least in hundreds upon hundreds of well done tests, it consistently fails to demonstrate any efficacy. If it DID, in some reproducible way, then it would point out something that really needs to be examined further.

Ok, so you 'pointed it out' - with nothing of substance to back it up I might add.

You're the one claiming that magnets have deadly poles. I asked for any citations to that.

But... ok, I'll bite...

Although not a formal 'study', a 2 minute google search reveals this lesson transcript detailing the differences between the two polarities.

Not that they don't have two polarities, there's no such thing as 'north pole energy' vs 'south pole energy'. A magnetic field is not energy.

Then on the same results page I found this actual study (apologies if it doesn't meet your obviously high standards) showing - gasp! - efficacy of static magnetic fields on reducing inflammation and edema in rats.

That's the one paper we were talking about in the other thread, which I acknowledged. There are hundreds that don't, though. So it's interesting, and will be more so if they can reproduce it.

And here is a page with lots of apparently knowledgeable people from all over the world discussing the use of magnets for speeding the healing of bones - including even spinal cord injuries - and - gasp! - increasing blood flow/circulation, etc...

THAT is talking about something else altogether. Time varying magnetic fields induce electrical currents. The mechanism for healing bone (and to some extent, soft tissue damage) is controlled by small electrical currents generated at bone damage sites by piezoelectric generation in the bone. In effect, the bone damage sort of calls out for osteoblasts to migrate into the area and lay down bone to stop the current being generated. rTMS simulates this by inducing currents in the area with a time-varying field. This is very different from a static magnetic field.

You really should rethink your religious affiliations (science worshiper), at least a little.

One of the things that will likely be - if it happens - the downfall of man is our arrogance.

How many times has science had to correct itself? How many times will it have to do so in the future before either we off ourselves, or lose our arrogance, and admit that we don't know everything, and what we do know is likely to be wrong, or at the very least, incomplete.

Ah, there we go. I thought that would pop in eventually. The very nature of science is to correct itself. That's not its weakness, it is the strength of the technique. It's how science works. And in this case, a lot of studies designed to remove false observation and personal bias say it doesn't do anything. Which also sort of agrees with what we understand about how static magnetic fields affect things.

Separating out confirmation bias and false association is a really necessary step, because people have systematic misperceptions that gave us things like religion, and thinking that grains of wheat turned into mice. We'd still be afraid that the gods were fighting during every thunderstorm if we didn't get past false correlations.

originally posted by: UniFinity
a reply to: GetHyped

okey...

yet, some people are getting magically better.

Yet, would they have gotten better without, and did the magnets help at all?

That's the question. It's hard to ferret that out, grant you. Getting better by itself isn't a good indicator, people tend to do that with or without magnets.

a reply to: Bedlam

you are correct about at least one thing, I have not done any science.

But I have done research about other scientist who had some unusual ideas about the universe and they were all considered geniuses when they were alive and have done many amazing things, but some of them are hushed up, some considered crazy...if it were nothing, they why would they do that, it would be unnecessary.

and then there is Kirlian photography, which I already mentioned...

than there are for instance shaolin monks, which can do many amazing things with there bodies...they use this energy also.
It is nothing special and everyone can be aware of it, with some practice, even you could if you wanted to and until you don't get some experience you will not know...and because of only science you think there is nothing there, ignorant of such basic thing.

In my opinion you don't get your mind enough credit, it is far more amazing than current science will admit and is capable of amazing tricks, real and fake. : )

Magnets are also one part of the puzzle to our health it seems and can probably help to make some natural balance within. If our science would be any good, they should discover what is the case instead of denial.

But is it okey, think as you wish and trust modern science, instead of your own experience you could have with a bit of practice, I don't want to change your mind.

Thank you for your opinion. Lets agree to disagree.

I want to know, I am a health professional interested in all types of cures,I never dismiss anything just like that, but I need real evidence.

Nothing wrong with wanting to know - unless you simply refuse to believe in anything unless/until you are provided 'real evidence' - assuming by this you mean PCRDB studies, as opposed to just anecdotal evidence (which is the beginning of all evidence gathering).

How does gravity work? How does a single cell, under certain conditions, grow into a fully developed human baby? I know there are some here who can (probably) describe the mechanics of both really well - but can you explain the fundamental how or why? No (if you are honest).

I can explain how a cell becomes a little person,

Really? I think more than likely you are able to explain the process - ie, 'the cell divides...' - but cannot explain how and why the cell divides in the first place. If you can do that, I'm all ears.

and I can also explain the pathophysiology of the most common diseases and the pharmacology of the most common drugs. To me the explanation is really important, it may not be for the layperson, but to me it is.

If you're in the business, then yes, details would be important to you.

The form of quackery I despise the most is the promotion of cures that cannot be explained, because they can endanger lives.

???

Surely you are mis-speaking? Please tell me you didn't just say that the fact that something cannot be explained means it can endanger lives? In fact the exact opposite can be just as true, and the persecution of Semmelweiss by science worshiping morons is a perfect example.

As to your responding to my admittedly non-obviously rhetorical question regarding a study proving chemo works - sorry, I should have warned you, I know how these things work, and how the data can be easily manipulated to tell whatever story the story tellers want.

Meaning, because billions (trillions?) of dollars are at stake, I simply do not trust them.

a reply to: tanstaafl

Your silly magnets are a $5 billion dollar a year business so, stop pretending there is no money in it. I've had chronic back pain for seven years and ain't drinking your kool-aid.

I had one episode that lasted over a month. On my way to a party I slipped and fell on some ice covered stairs. One stair hit me right where the bulging disk is. When I stood up and the pain was gone, do you think falling on the stairs cured me?

originally posted by: UniFinity
a reply to: Bedlam

and then there is Kirlian photography, which I already mentioned...

Kirlian photography is great for showing you surface contamination and moisture residue. The 'effects' you get with it can be shown to be nothing but that.

The 'half a leaf' picture is an example. They take it by taking an image of the entire leaf, then tearing half the leaf away, and making a second image. It seems to show you a sort of phantom image of the missing part. Proof!

But...not really. If you clean the plates between shots, the phantom half goes away. Because you're actually imaging residue that the leaf left on the plate.

than there are for instance shaolin monks, which can do many amazing things with there bodies...they use this energy also.

Or they think they are.

a reply to: Bedlam

about Krillin, that is your opinion and not a fact.

as far as shaolin, there are also documentaries about them and some scientific measurements of their impossible feats...so you may think whatever you like, but facts show that they are doing something, facts by scientific measurements...

it is a bit of pattern here on ats, when you show someone science itself can be used to already show evidence of something more, yet it is not accepted due to personal confirmation bias.

Parapsychology was another field, which they shut down. But there are many good books about it still, and in them one can learn the truth about the results they were getting in experiments...

well as far as me goes, there is far more evidence that science at the moment does not know the full picture of reality it is not even close to it, due to being materialistic and driven by people who don't like to think out of the box due to wrong views and principles learned in university.

this evidence is not measurable, but results can be observed, for instance it shows in magnets or many other areas where people are getting results or doing something which science says it is not possible...yet in reality there it is.

admitting we don't know all of reality yet, there is nothing wrong with that, but science (scientists) is getting ahead of itself with a bit of arrogance that it knows and it can say what is possible and what is not...on ats and in general.

I wish more people will do their own study instead of relying on only science as science should be viewed as just another possible opinion and not the truth.

well, this is probably last post in this thread as I am just sharing my opinion and I feel it is enough and no use to continue...but it was fun to rumble with you again
: )

originally posted by: tanstaafl
Really? I think more than likely you are able to explain the process - ie, 'the cell divides...' - but cannot explain how and why the cell divides in the first place. If you can do that, I'm all ears.

Well, of course I can explain the process, that's the 'how', however it is a very complicated process and I only know the basics, for example I know the zigote's mitosis is stimulated by a hormone, but I couldn't say which hormone without looking it up. There is no 'why' per se, it's all done automatically simply because the reproductive cells exist to do just that, reproduction (as each cell in our body has a specific function).

Surely you are mis-speaking? Please tell me you didn't just say that the fact that something cannot be explained means it can endanger lives?

First of all if you cannot explain how something works then you shouldn't trust it, I encourage all patients to find out exactly how their treatments work. Second, sometimes choosing alternative treatments that have no evidence of being effective, instead of seeking real ones, have killed people, this is just one sad example: www.abovetopsecret.com...

That child could have survived if it wasn't for his parents ignorance and selfishness.
Steve Jobs is another example.

I'm obviously not talking about magnets or crystals as they do not cause any physiological changes in our bodies.

originally posted by: anton74
I had one episode that lasted over a month. On my way to a party I slipped and fell on some ice covered stairs. One stair hit me right where the bulging disk is. When I stood up and the pain was gone, do you think falling on the stairs cured me?

Many posters here believe testimonials are evidence so I would say yes, falling on the stairs have cured you. From now on you can promote falling on stairs as a new 'proven' cure for back pain.
lol

originally posted by: UniFinity
a reply to: Bedlam

about Krillin, that is your opinion and not a fact.

No, you can do it yourself. If the plate's cleaned between shots, no 'phantom leaf'. And that's "Kirlian".

...due to being materialistic and driven by people who don't like to think out of the box due to wrong views and principles learned in university.

Well, you're using something made by someone who didn't "think out of the box" called a computer. It's crammed full of tech you can't begin to understand. Someone invented it. And it works. Can't say that for 'subtle energy'.

a reply to: Bedlam

okey, I just have to say this, to make something clear...

it may seem like I hate science, I don't and logical reasoning is something which is a requirement when one is meditating and experiencing unknown things!
I am just open minded enough to consider other stuff which is unknown to science at the moment. Science has no say in what is possible or not and never will, but many don't realize that, it seems.

Reality does not care about science or our own opinion, it is what it is.
Experience is what counts and experiences for many people (more people than not!) all over the globe are against what science is preaching about.
Sooo it is personal choice what you believe to be true or not based on experience. i would say in general we just had different experiences, if you would be in my shoes and I in yours ...

I am happy with usage of some devices (but try to keep it to a minimum) and also know a lot about computers and technology in general as I was a passionate geek when young and still am currently a php programmer for work so I know about computers and how they work, more than any random person at least...and in my opinion it is far less amazing than "magical" subtle energy, for instance it cannot heal anything on its own as energy seems to be able to, somehow, with magnets... soo also far less important for the quality of life!

imho

: )

originally posted by: Bedlam
You created it, but you don't own it. Nor are you the gatekeeper for discussion about the subject. And I'm not hijacking it. Just not agreeing with you.

And being extremely condescending in the process. No worries, my only dilemma is, between you and the fly buzzing around my office, I'm not sure which is more annoying...

I said:
I have no problem with discussion, I just dislike when someone tries to pass off condescending dis-respectful rants as 'discussion'.

You responded:
i.e. 'agree with me or I'll become cross'

No, that would be 'disagree with me respectfully, or I will respond in kind'.

"You are wrong, friend. The relief was as close to 'instantaneous' as can be for something like this - 24 hours from terminal agony to pain free "

Yes... and? Maybe you have reading/comprehension issues? You said 'minutes' - since when does 24 hours mean 'minutes'?

I neither like nor dislike. To me, part of the interest in the story is why an obviously rational person would ignore the many many other things that were apparently going on

Excuse me? Ignore them? I was the one in constant agony, going to the chiro 3 or 4 times per week for months on end with ZERO relief and dropping 500mg Naproxen like they were candy just to get an hour or two of tortured sleep. IGNORED?? Please. You're bordering on TROLL now.

THEY (the 'many many other things going on'). WERE. NOT. WORKING. AT. ALL. PERIOD. END. OF. STORY.

to focus on one thing in that congeries that 'had to be it'.

Going from that extreme, unending pain for almost 5 months with ZERO relief from any of the 'many other things', to being pain free, within a single 24 hour period, after the initial application of the magnets - and reproducing this effect 4(?) times afterwards - yeah, nothing there, move along, nothing to see, get in line for your neck surgery that could leave you paralyzed for life. NOT.

Despite there being no proof at all that magnets do anything in the way of healing, and a lot of proof that they don't.

Guess we'll have to disagree... you can believe random documents buried in a corrupted system, I'll believe my own experiences.

You're the one claiming that magnets have deadly poles. I asked for any citations to that.

Here we go again. Please stop putting words in my mouth. If you continue, you will simply be providing proof that you are, in fact, a troll.

I never said 'magnets have deadly poles'. I first said that the title of the lecture I sat in on was 'Magnets can cure, and magnets can kill'. Someone else asked me to elaborate, so I did, explaining that it was the potential mis-use of magnets that can kill - a specific example being using the south pole side of a magnet against the body over an area that is already compromised with cancer (possibly some other forms of disease), the south pole 'energy' can supposedly speed up the growth of the cancer. I don't know if this is true or not, it is what was explained to me.

Put another way, north pole 'energy' is calming, and south pole 'energy' is stimulating, and you don't want to 'stimulate' cancer cells.

Not that they don't have two polarities, there's no such thing as 'north pole energy' vs 'south pole energy'. A magnetic field is not energy.

My, you are a pedantic one, aren't you?

I'm using the word 'energy' simply because I don't have a better one. If it makes you happy, engage your internal SED engine to change 'energy' to 'side of the magnet'.

I said:
And here is a page with lots of apparently knowledgeable people from all over the world discussing the use of magnets for speeding the healing of bones - including even spinal cord injuries - and - gasp! - increasing blood flow/circulation, etc...

you said:
THAT is talking about something else altogether. Time varying magnetic fields induce electrical currents. The mechanism for healing bone (and to some extent, soft tissue damage) is controlled by small electrical currents generated at bone damage sites by piezoelectric generation in the bone. In effect, the bone damage sort of calls out for osteoblasts to migrate into the area and lay down bone to stop the current being generated. rTMS simulates this by inducing currents in the area with a time-varying field. This is very different from a static magnetic field.

Read more closely. That page has lots of different comments from lots of different people, some of which are referring to static magnetic fields (from magnets). Also, I acknowledge that there are comments in there from other naysayers (like yourself), but my point is, the door is far from closed on the matter, in contradiction to what you would have others believe.

I said:
How many times has science had to correct itself?

You said:
Ah, there we go. I thought that would pop in eventually. The very nature of science is to correct itself. That's not its weakness, it is the strength of the technique.

Of course you have to say this, or you'd lose all credibility.

And in this case, a lot of studies designed to remove false observation and personal bias say it doesn't do anything.

A lot, yes (and some are contrary, a fact you are apparently more than happy to ignore) - and they are flawed for one of any number of reasons, due to that very same 'confirmation bias' you refer to below.

2 examples of this:

a) The numerous older studies that served as the basis for the fear-mongering that high amounts of Vitamin D were 'extremely toxic', and resulted in a population of people dangerously deficient in Vitamin D, all used the synthetic D2, vs D3, because, well, 'everyone in the scientific community knows there is no difference between the two'. Why/how did this happen? A way was found to manufacture D2 cheaply, and could be (was) patented and sold for huge profits.

b) The study (I think this was the 'paradigm shifting' study) that 'proved' that small amounts of aspirin were good for the heart used aspirin containing magnesium (Bufferin). Magnesium, is now known as the 'heart vitamin'. But of course it was 'aspirin' that was pushed by the drug pushers.

Why is it so hard for some people to understand that in many cases where natural (ie, non-patentable (non-PROFITABLE) therapies are concerned, people can and will intentionally corrupt the scientific process?

Which also sort of agrees with what we understand about how static magnetic fields affect things.

There is your confirmation bias yet again.

Were we still in the dark ages, you would likely be right there alongside the rest of the 'scientific community', calling for Galileo's head on a platter for daring to question the scientific fact that the earth was flat, and the sun revolved around it.

Separating out confirmation bias and false association is a really necessary step

It is necessary to documenting the hows and whys, yes - but it is not necessary to fully spec things like this before they can be used/taken advantage of. If it works, it works, and it is criminal negligence (at best) to ignore it when people's lives/quality of life is at stake.

originally posted by: tanstaaflI'll ask you a question: how many prescription medications that had plenty of 'gold standard' support (randomized double-blind placebo controlled studies) 'proving' efficacy have been pulled from the market with large class action lawsuits leading to huge settlements?

Interesting how all of the science worshipers never address questions like these...

originally posted by: surfer_soulJust because you weren't expecting any results from the magnets doesn't mean the Placebo effect couldn't have kicked in though,

I'm very curious - as far I know, this is the 'placebo effect' - meaning, the Placebo effect is caused by the expectation of the subject...

So, how could it work without that element?